Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

GRaSP-FCI returns empty graph #106

Open
edpclau opened this issue Jan 29, 2025 · 5 comments
Open

GRaSP-FCI returns empty graph #106

edpclau opened this issue Jan 29, 2025 · 5 comments

Comments

@edpclau
Copy link

edpclau commented Jan 29, 2025

Hi, @jdramsey! I'm having some issues running GRaSP-FCI with my data. It always returns an empty graph. It may because it's running properly, but I don't know enough to make sure all the settings are correct.

Code:
java -jar /Users/eddie/Downloads/causal-cmd-1.12.0-jar-with-dependencies.jar
--dataset "minimal_set.csv"
--data-type mixed
--delimiter comma
--missing-marker "*"
--numCategories 6
--algorithm grasp-fci
--score dg-bic-score
--test dg-lr-test
--resamplingWithReplacement
--numberResampling 1
--resamplingEnsemble 2
--numStarts 1
--addOriginalDataset yes
--saveBootstrapGraphs yes
--json-graph
--verbose yes
--out

graspfci_1738161916503_out.txt

@jdramsey
Copy link
Contributor

jdramsey commented Feb 3, 2025

Oh I did not see this! One issue may be that causal-cmd is somewhat out of date. Would you be able to try it in Python using py-tetrad?

@jdramsey
Copy link
Contributor

jdramsey commented Feb 3, 2025

I guess I can try later to see if I get empty graphs when I give it mixed data with missing values. Maybe it's a problem with the current GRaSP-FCI as well. I can't do it right now though.

@edpclau
Copy link
Author

edpclau commented Feb 3, 2025

I'm running it on py-tetrad now; I'll let you know if I get the same error. BTW, would you recommend using the "cg-bic-score" instead of the "dg-big-score"?

@jdramsey
Copy link
Contributor

jdramsey commented Feb 3, 2025

They have different characteristics and are differently motivated. The CG score is useful if you think the discrete variables follow a multinomial disstribution. The DG score is useful in this case as well but really works the best if the effect of each value of the parent for a discrete-->continuous link follows a mean shift pattern.

Usually I used DG anymore, but for the longest time I preferred CG. I would look at conditional histograms of your data if you're able.

@edpclau
Copy link
Author

edpclau commented Feb 5, 2025

Thank you! That's a great insight to have. Most of my variable links should be continuous-->discrete so I think CG might be better.

Back to the topic of GRaSP-FCI. I just finished running it on py-tetrad (it runs so much slower) and it gave me the same error. I do get this message tho: "java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: Exception when trying to determine INR || Fentanyl | Epinephrine".

I think I might have too much missing data. So, my next step is to see how I can get MICE imputation going.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants