> But I would argue that's not really a case of an outlier, From the point of view of the data it is definitely an outlier. > that's a mixture distribution be

> But I would argue that's not really a case of an outlier, From the point of view of the data it is definitely an outlier. > that's a mixture distribution because the underlying identifying feature (baseball or rocket) is missing. This is the point of the paper. They literally say in the blog post summary: To attribute the outlier event to a variable, we ask the counterfactual question “Would the event not have been an outlier had the causal mechanism of that variable been normal?”