<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Causality on Elias Wendt</title>
    <link>https://eliaswendt.de/tags/causality/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Causality on Elias Wendt</description>
    
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2026 21:39:09 +0200</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://eliaswendt.de/tags/causality/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Causal Machine Learning</title>
      <link>https://eliaswendt.de/posts/causal-machine-learning/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2026 21:39:09 +0200</pubDate>
      <guid>https://eliaswendt.de/posts/causal-machine-learning/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Modern machine learning is incredible at finding statistical patterns in large datasets. Neural networks regularly reach or beat human performance in vision, speech, and language tasks.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, relying only on statistical correlations comes with a major catch: standard models assume that the test data follows the exact same distribution as the training data. In the real world, data distributions shift. When this occurs, purely statistical models often fail.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To build models that are robust to distribution shifts, we have to look beyond pure correlation and turn to causal inference.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
