Disentangling causality: assumptions in causal discovery and inference

Causality has been a burgeoning field of research leading to the point where the literature abounds with different components addressing distinct parts of causality. For researchers, it has been increasingly difficult to discern the assumptions they have to abide by in order to glean sound conclusions from causal concepts or methods. This paper aims to disambiguate the different causal concepts that have emerged in causal inference and causal discovery from observational data by attributing them to different levels of Pearl's Causal Hierarchy. We will provide the reader with a comprehensive arrangement of assumptions necessary to engage in causal reasoning at the desired level of the hierarchy. Therefore, the assumptions underlying each of these causal concepts will be emphasized and their concomitant graphical components will be examined. We show which assumptions are necessary to bridge the gaps between causal discovery, causal identification and causal inference from a parametric and a non-parametric perspective. Finally, this paper points to further research areas related to the strong assumptions that researchers have glibly adopted to take part in causal discovery, causal identification and causal inference.

Automated summary

This paper aims to disambiguate the different causal concepts that have emerged in causal inference and causal discovery from observational data by attributing them to different levels of Pearl's Causal Hierarchy. We will provide the reader with a comprehensive arrangement of assumptions necessary to engage in causal reasoning at the desired level of the hierarchy. Finally, this paper points to further research areas related to the strong assumptions that researchers have glibly adopted to take part in causal discovery, causal identification and causal inference.