|
| 1 | +m-LiNGAM |
| 2 | +========= |
| 3 | + |
| 4 | +Model |
| 5 | +------------------- |
| 6 | + |
| 7 | +Missingness-LiNGAM (m-LiNGAM) extends the basic LiNGAM [1]_ model to handle datasets affected by missing values, including Missing Completely At Random (MCAR), Missing At Random (MAR), and Missing Not At Random (MNAR) cases. |
| 8 | +It enables the identification of the true underlying causal structure and provides unbiased parameter estimates even when data are not fully observed. |
| 9 | + |
| 10 | +The model combines the principles of LiNGAM and the graphical representation of missingness mechanisms using *missingness graphs* (m-graphs) [2]_. |
| 11 | +In this framework, variables can be fully observed or partially observed, and each partially observed variable is associated with a missingness mechanism and a proxy variable. |
| 12 | + |
| 13 | +Let the set of variables be: |
| 14 | + |
| 15 | +.. math:: |
| 16 | +
|
| 17 | + V = V_o \cup V_m \cup U \cup V^* \cup R |
| 18 | +
|
| 19 | +where: |
| 20 | + |
| 21 | +- :math:`V_o` are fully observed variables, |
| 22 | +- :math:`V_m` are partially observed variables, |
| 23 | +- :math:`U` are latent variables (here assumed empty), |
| 24 | +- :math:`V^*` are proxy variables (what is actually observed, corresponding to dataset columns with missing values) |
| 25 | +- :math:`R` are missingness mechanism. |
| 26 | + |
| 27 | +The induced subgraph :math:`G[V_o \cup V_m]` follows a LiNGAM model, meaning that for every variable :math:`X_i \in (V_o \cup V_m)`: |
| 28 | + |
| 29 | +.. math:: |
| 30 | +
|
| 31 | + x_i = \sum_{k(j)<k(i)}b_{ij}x_j + e_i, \qquad e_i\sim \text{Non-Gaussian}(\cdot) |
| 32 | +
|
| 33 | +where :math:`i\in\{1,\dots,n\}\mapsto k(i)` denotes a causal order, and the non-gaussian error terms are independent. |
| 34 | + |
| 35 | +The induced subgraph :math:`G[V_o \cup V_m \cup R]` follows a LiM model. The missingness mechanisms :math:`R_i \in R` follow a logistic model as for binary variables in LiM [3]_: |
| 36 | + |
| 37 | +.. math:: |
| 38 | + x_i = \mathbf 1\llbracket\sum_{k(j)<k(i)} b_{ij} x_j + e_i > 0\rrbracket, \qquad e_i \sim \text{Logistic}(0,1) |
| 39 | +
|
| 40 | +
|
| 41 | +Assumptions |
| 42 | +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 43 | + |
| 44 | +The following assumptions are made to ensure identifiability: |
| 45 | + |
| 46 | +#. No latent confounders (:math:`U = \emptyset`). |
| 47 | +#. No causal interactions between missingness mechanisms (:math:`R_i \notin Pa(R_j)` for all :math:`i \neq j`). |
| 48 | +#. No direct self-masking (:math:`X_i \notin Pa(R_i)` for any :math:`X_i \in V_m`). |
| 49 | + |
| 50 | +Note that even if direct self-masking is not allowed, a partially observed variable can be an indirect cause (an ancestor) of its own missingness mechanism (indirect self-masking). |
| 51 | +Under these assumptions, m-LiNGAM guarantees identifiability of both the causal structure and parameters from observational data in the large-sample limit. |
| 52 | + |
| 53 | +An example Python notebook demonstrating m-LiNGAM is available `here <https://github.com/cdt15/lingam/blob/master/examples/MissingnessLiNGAM.ipynb>`__. |
| 54 | + |
| 55 | +References |
| 56 | +------------------- |
| 57 | + |
| 58 | +.. [1] S. Shimizu, P. O. Hoyer, A. Hyvärinen, and A. J. Kerminen. |
| 59 | + *A Linear Non-Gaussian Acyclic Model for Causal Discovery.* |
| 60 | + Journal of Machine Learning Research, 7:2003–2030, 2006. |
| 61 | +
|
| 62 | +.. [2] K. Mohan, J. Pearl, and J. Tian. |
| 63 | + *Graphical Models for Inference with Missing Data.* |
| 64 | + Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2013. |
| 65 | +
|
| 66 | +.. [3] Y. Zeng, S. Shimizu, H. Matsui, and F. Sun. |
| 67 | + *Causal Discovery for Linear Mixed Data.* |
| 68 | + In Proceedings of the First Conference on Causal Learning and Reasoning (CLeaR 2022), PMLR 177, pp. 994–1009, 2022. |
0 commit comments