I thought this was a good response to Imbens paper. Very simple, succinct responses explaining better the value of DAGs. The point about shape restrictions and so forth comes up @paulgp and @AlexBartik FYI. I got to fourth point and tweeted this so maybe it goes off rails at 5.https://twitter.com/yudapearl/status/1222814915921997824 …
-
I mean, I'm a total outsider here, but did not expect to read
@yudapearl's real message this whole time has been "embrace PO but enrich it with graphs" Did you hack his blog and write this? ;-)
Clarification! @yudapearl has embraced the counterfactual notation Y_x, as did PO. But he could not embrace the "PO approach", which permits researchers to assume what they need, instead of what they believe. Not their fault, PO could not express what they believed @Bookofwhy
