, 3 tweets, 1 min read Read on Twitter
By all means. I hereby advocate, as always, that data-science rests on two equally important pillars: causal inference and statistical estimation. However, a glaring asymmetry can be seen today in academia: researchers in the CI pillars are thirsty for new
2/3 tools from the estimation pillar but not the other way. By and large, leaders of the stat pillars have zero interest in advances emerging from the CI pillar. The great majority of them truly believe in "do it the classical way" and "a causal model is a special case of a
3/3 predictive model". Moreover, in academia, the stat pillar dominates its CI partner by 100:1 ratio, and now insists on total dominion in the name of "its just a special case". Thus, to achieve equilibrium, I think CI needs academic autonomy, at least for a while. #Bookofwhy
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Judea Pearl
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!