So I basically just want to know if my reasoning is valid.
I have a hunch that in the real world most causal effects are harder to manipulate or to magically stop working.
For example rain getting an object wet will usually be always causally true not merely a correlation.
My question is basically assuming CDT has this higher baseline invariancy, would it be reasonable to ask a question like "Just because EDT wins sometimes, does the behavorial invariance of CDT on average over many asymtotic DT problems trials prove more robust and thus successful on average"
I guess even then it would apply to certain sets of problems different than others.
But mostly wanted to get thoughts on if anybody had similar ideas, or if I am just an idiot.
This post is in relation to CDT, EDT, FDT, etc.
So I basically just want to know if my reasoning is valid.
I have a hunch that in the real world most causal effects are harder to manipulate or to magically stop working.
For example rain getting an object wet will usually be always causally true not merely a correlation.
My question is basically assuming CDT has this higher baseline invariancy, would it be reasonable to ask a question like "Just because EDT wins sometimes, does the behavorial invariance of CDT on average over many asymtotic DT problems trials prove more robust and thus successful on average"
I guess even then it would apply to certain sets of problems different than others.
But mostly wanted to get thoughts on if anybody had similar ideas, or if I am just an idiot.