Age- and Sex-Specific Causal Effects of Adiposity on Cardiovascular Risk Factors

Observational studies have reported different effects of adiposity on cardiovascular risk factors across age and sex. Since cardiovascular risk factors are enriched in obese individuals, it has not been easy to dissect the effects of adiposity from those of other risk factors. We used a Mendelian randomization approach, applying a set of 32 genetic markers to estimate the causal effect of adiposity on blood pressure, glycemic indices, circulating lipid levels, and markers of inflammation and liver disease in up to 67,553 individuals. All analyses were stratified by age (cutoff 55 years of age) and sex. The genetic score was associated with BMI in both nonstratified analysis (P = 2.8 × 10(-107)) and stratified analyses (all P < 3.3 × 10(-30)). We found evidence of a causal effect of adiposity on blood pressure, fasting levels of insulin, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, HDL cholesterol, and triglycerides in a nonstratified analysis and in the <55-year stratum. Further, we found evidence of a smaller causal effect on total cholesterol (P for difference = 0.015) in the ≥55-year stratum than in the <55-year stratum, a finding that could be explained by biology, survival bias, or differential medication. In conclusion, this study extends previous knowledge of the effects of adiposity by providing sex- and age-specific causal estimates on cardiovascular risk factors.

Reasoning Rights: Comparative judicial engagement

This edited book is about comparative reasoning in human rights cases, exploring the questions: How is it that notionally universal norms are reasoned by courts in such dramatically different ways? What is the shape of this reasoning? What techniques are common across the transnational jurisprudence? What techniques are diverse? With contributions by a team of world-leading human rights scholars, the book moves beyond simply addressing the institutional questions concerning courts and human rights, which too often dominate discussions of this kind. Instead, it seeks a deeper examination of the similarities and divergence in the content of reasons being developed by different courts when addressing comparable human rights questions. These differences, while partly influenced by institutional issues, cannot be attributable to them alone. The book explores the diverse and rich underlying spectrum of human rights reasoning, as a distinctive and particular form of legal reasoning, evident in the case studies across the selected jurisdictions. It is a fascinating study for all those interested in human rights law and legal reasoning.

Using Comparative Reasoning in Human Rights Adjudication:The Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights Compared

This article examines the relationship between the methods that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) use to decide disputes that involve ‘human’ or ‘fundamental’ rights claims, and the substantive outcomes that result from the use of these particular methods. It has a limited aim: in attempting to understand the interrelationship between human rights methodology and human rights outcomes, it considers primarily the use of ‘comparative reasoning’ in ‘human’ and ‘fundamental’ rights claims by these courts. It is not primarily concerned with examining the extent to which the use of comparative reasoning is based on an appropriate methodology or whether there is a persuasive normative theory underpinning the use of comparative reasoning. The issues considered in this chapter do some of the groundwork, however, that is necessary in order to address these methodological and normative questions.

Children's use of interventions to learn causal structure

Children aged between 5 and 8 years freely intervened on a three-variable causal system, with their task being to discover whether it was a common-cause structure or one of two causal chains. From 6-7 years, children were able to use information from their interventions to correctly disambiguate the structure of a causal chain. We used a Bayesian model to examine children’s interventions on the system; this showed that with development children became more efficient in producing the interventions needed to disambiguate the causal structure and that the quality of interventions, as measured by their informativeness, improved developmentally. The latter measure was a significant predictor of children’s correct inferences about the causal structure. A second experiment showed that levels of performance were not reduced in a task in which children did not select and carry out interventions themselves, indicating no advantage for self-directed learning. However, children’s performance was not related to intervention quality in these circumstances, suggesting that children learn in a different way when they carry out interventions themselves.

Moral asymmetries in judgments of agency withstand ludicrous causal deviance

Americans have been shown to attribute greater intentionality to immoral than to amoral actions in cases of causal deviance, that is, cases where a goal is satisfied in a way that deviates from initially planned means (e.g., a gunman wants to hit a target and his hand slips, but the bullet ricochets off a rock into the target). However, past research has yet to assess whether this asymmetry persists in cases of extreme causal deviance. Here, we manipulated the level of mild to extreme causal deviance of an immoral versus amoral act. The asymmetry in attributions of intentionality was observed at all but the
most extreme level of causal deviance, and, as we hypothesized, was mediated by attributions of Blame/credit and judgments of action performance. These findings are discussed as they support a multiple-concepts interpretation of the asymmetry, wherein blame renders a naïve concept of intentional action (the outcome matches the intention) more salient than a composite concept (the outcome matches the intention and was brought about by planned means), and in terms of their implications for cross-cultural research on judgments of agency.

Kinect and Episodic Reasoning for Human Action Recognition

This paper presents a method for rational behaviour recognition that combines vision-based pose estimation with knowledge modeling and reasoning. The proposed method consists of two stages. First, RGB-D images are used in the estimation of the body postures. Then, estimated actions are evaluated to verify that they make sense. This method requires rational behaviour to be exhibited. To comply with this requirement, this work proposes a rational RGB-D dataset with two types of sequences, some for training and some for testing. Preliminary results show the addition of knowledge modeling and reasoning leads to a significant increase of recognition accuracy when compared to a system based only on computer vision.

Automated Equation Formulation for Causal Loop Diagrams

The annotation of Business Dynamics models with parameters and equations, to simulate the system under study and further evaluate its simulation output, typically involves a lot of manual work. In this paper we present an approach for automated equation formulation of a given Causal Loop Diagram (CLD) and a set of associated time series with the help of neural network evolution (NEvo). NEvo enables the automated retrieval of surrogate equations for each quantity in the given CLD, hence it produces a fully annotated CLD that can be used for later simulations to predict future KPI development. In the end of the paper, we provide a detailed evaluation of NEvo on a business use-case to demonstrate its single step prediction capabilities.