<div dir="auto">It may not be fun but it's essential in algorithms for inferring causation from correlation.<br><br><div data-smartmail="gmail_signature">---<br>Frank C. Wimberly<br>140 Calle Ojo Feliz, <br>Santa Fe, NM 87505<br><br>505 670-9918<br>Santa Fe, NM</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Dec 4, 2021, 5:53 PM Frank Wimberly <<a href="mailto:wimberly3@gmail.com">wimberly3@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">The point is if you know 2 has occurred you know the probability that 3 will occur. 2 occurring makes 1 irrelevant.<br><br>Very formally 1 is independent of 3 given 2. Please use my variable names to avoid my making an error.<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Frank<br><div data-smartmail="gmail_signature" dir="auto">---<br>Frank C. Wimberly<br>140 Calle Ojo Feliz, <br>Santa Fe, NM 87505<br><br>505 670-9918<br>Santa Fe, NM</div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Dec 4, 2021, 5:38 PM Nicholas Thompson <<a href="mailto:thompnickson2@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">thompnickson2@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Frank, <div><br></div><div>Still need help. Given events 1, 2, and 3, 3 has been screen off by 2 from 1, if the probability that 3 occurs given that 2 has occurred is equal to the probability that 3 occurs given that both 2 and one have occurred. As I understand mathematics this equality requires that the probability of 1 occurring is 1.00. Another way to say that is that the probability that 3 occurs if 2 has occurred is the same as the probability that 3 has occurred if 2 has occurred, and 1 has already occurred. What's the fun in that? In other words, given the possibility of other causes for 2, the fact that 2 occurs gives us relatively little evidence that 1 has occurred. Isn"t this true of all causal abduction? </div><div><br></div><div>N</div></div>
<br>
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .<br>
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 <a href="http://bit.ly/virtualfriam" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>
un/subscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a><br>
archives:<br>
5/2017 thru present <a href="https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/</a><br>
1/2003 thru 6/2021 <a href="http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>