Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31807692›Full record

ArticleScience advances2019

Detecting and quantifying causal associations in large nonlinear time series datasets.

Jakob Runge, Peer Nowack, Marlene Kretschmer, Seth Flaxman, Dino Sejdinovic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science advances, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 134 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
134citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

134 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Advances in causal discovery methods for ecological time series.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Assimilative causal inference.Nature communications · 2026
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

74 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jakob RungeGerman Aerospace Center, Institute of Data Science, 07745 Jena, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0629-1772
Peer NowackGrantham Institute, Imperial College, London SW7 2AZ, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4588-7832
Marlene KretschmerPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, 14473 Potsdam, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2756-9526
Seth FlaxmanData Science Institute, Imperial College, London SW7 2AZ, UK.
Dino SejdinovicThe Alan Turing Institute for Data Science, London NW1 3DB, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5547-9213

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identifying causal relationships and quantifying their strength from observational time series data are key problems in disciplines dealing with complex dynamical systems such as the Earth system or the human body. Data-driven causal inference in such systems is challenging since datasets are often high dimensional and nonlinear with limited sample sizes. Here, we introduce a novel method that flexibly combines linear or nonlinear conditional independence tests with a causal discovery algorithm to estimate causal networks from large-scale time series datasets. We validate the method on time series of well-understood physical mechanisms in the climate system and the human heart and using large-scale synthetic datasets mimicking the typical properties of real-world data. The experiments demonstrate that our method outperforms state-of-the-art techniques in detection power, which opens up entirely new possibilities to discover and quantify causal networks from time series across a range of research fields.

Identifiers

PMID31807692
PMCPMC6881151

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.