Causal and anti-causal learning in pattern recognition for neuroimaging
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Pattern recognition in neuroimaging distinguishes between two types of models: encoding- and decoding models. This distinction is based on the insight that brain state features, that are found to be relevant in an experimental paradigm, carry a different meaning in encoding- than in decoding models. In this paper, we argue that this distinction is not sufficient: Relevant features in encoding- and decoding models carry a different meaning depending on whether they represent causal- or anti-causal relations. We provide a theoretical justification for this argument and conclude that causal inference is essential for interpretation in neuroimaging.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 15 Dec 2015.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 0; 2025: 1.
4 papers.
- 2021Towards Causal Representation Learningcited by 209
- 2021Desiderata for Representation Learning: A Causal Perspectivecited by 76
- 2022Structural Causal 3D Reconstructioncited by 12
- 2025Causal vs. Anticausal merging of predictorscited by 1
- 2025Causal vs. Anticausal merging of predictors14 Jan 2025
- 2022Structural Causal 3D Reconstruction20 Jul 2022
- 2021Desiderata for Representation Learning: A Causal Perspective8 Sep 2021
- 2021Towards Causal Representation Learning22 Feb 2021