This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
This article was accepted on 22 December 2014 by reviewer Mz7 (talk·contribs).
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The term Causal Graph appears to denote in narrower subject areas what is more generally known as the Directed Acyclic Graph. It is striking for me as a reader to find no mention or reference to Directed Acyclic Graphs in this article. It would make more sense to me if these terms were used interchangeably, thereby combining clear and precise physical intuition with the rigour of mathematical description. Of course, we are here not to change things, but to simply document them. Therefore, I appeal to experts in the respective subject areas to consider merging the articles, or, at the very least, editing this article to reflect that it refers to a subject-specific application of the concept known as the Directed Acyclic Graph.
AVM2019 (talk) 20:55, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Incorrect. It denotes a graphical model, which is not just a graph, but a piece of information that describes both a graph and a probability distribution. And the illustrations in this article include bidirectional arrows, making it very clear that the graphs described in this article are not intended to be restricted to directed and acyclic graphs. Therefore, I oppose this proposed merge. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:42, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with DE -- possibly this article should include some reference to the article directed acyclic graph, but they are not the same thing and it doesn't seem natural to cover this kind of model at that article. --JBL (talk) 01:39, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I find your arguments convincing, although it was easy for me to initially overlook the difference DE pointed at. I see that Wikipedia guidelines suggest allowing one week for the discussion, so I guess, I am not supposed to retract the merge proposal template at this time. AVM2019 (talk) 06:29, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
No, they are not formally the same concepts. One can construct Causal Graph without invoking Bayesian Networks. Hence, I am not in favour of merging. --mcyp (talk) 07:31, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]