Causal Discovery (CD) from observational data faces two fundamental challenges. First, purely statistical methods often lack the power to resolve structural ambiguities in low-sample regimes. Second, although LLM-assisted hybrid approaches improve structure recovery through semantic reasoning, the influence of that reasoning on individual edge decisions remains largely opaque. Consequently, existing hybrid methods fail to satisfy a fundamental requirement: explaining why a particular edge is included or excluded in the learned directed acyclic graph (DAG). This is critical in real-world applications, where no ground-truth DAG exists and every structural decision must be independently justified. We formalize this requirement as decision traceability, requiring every inferred edge to be supported by auditable statistical evidence, Markov Blanket consistency, or explicit domain reasoning. We propose GENESIS, an explainable hybrid CD framework that decomposes graph construction into interpretable decision points. GENESIS first identifies and scores three-node structural motifs, including chains, forks, and colliders, to establish transparent structural priors, then progressively refines the graph by integrating these priors with observational evidence, invoking domain knowledge only when statistical evidence is insufficient. By design, every edge decision is resolved through an auditable source of evidence. Experiments show that GENESIS achieves 100% decision traceability across all settings, establishing explainability as a first-class objective in causal discovery. Despite this additional requirement, GENESIS consistently outperforms purely statistical CD methods on the majority of benchmark datasets across all sample regimes in terms of Structural Hamming Distance (SHD), while achieving performance comparable to state-of-the-art LLM-assisted approaches.
DAG-FM is proposed, a novel foundation model architecture that amortizes causal discovery and introduces Mixture-of-Leaf-Experts (MoLE) to handle diverse and unknown Functional Causal Model (FCM) assumptions in real-world scenarios.
SVI-DAG is proposed, a structured variational inference approach to Bayesian causal discovery using observational data and prior beliefs that uses normalizing flows to model dependencies between edges, supporting expressive and multimodal posterior learning over DAGs.
Causal discovery algorithms learn a network that describes the causal dependencies among random variables. A common workflow involves first utilizing conditional independence properties on observational data to determine partially directed causal relationships, then applying interventions to orient the unknown causal directions. A critical assumption for the first step is faithfulness: a requirement that causally linked variables exhibit statistical dependence. Many natural systems include buffering and stabilizing pathways that cancel out to achieve systemic robustness. This cancellation of pathways violates faithfulness, leading causal discovery algorithms to incorrectly remove causal dependencies. In this paper, we argue that hard interventions contain information about the presence/absence of causal linkage that is overlooked in the first stage of structure discovery. We show that a mild assumption -- called intervention-immediacy faithfulness -- that allows cancellations, is sufficient to nonparametrically identify causal structures with hard interventions. These results position interventions as the primary carriers of information about causal structure, which should take precedence over conditional independence testing. To flip the paradigm, we also specify equivalence classes when the identification criteria are not met due to limitations in the scope of interventions.
This work considers the task of conditional causal discovery as a Bayesian inference problem, in which the posterior is targeted over causal graphs and parameters conditional on an event such as a causal-effect constraint, and adapts rare-event estimation techniques to perform inference the joint graph-parameter space.
Cixuan Zhang, Guy Van den Broeck, Benjie Wang· 0 citations
Explaining why a specific outcome occurred, and which inputs deserve the blame or credit, is central to philosophical, scientific, and policy analysis. Existing tools split into two camps. The theory of actual causality (AC) gives principled verdicts, but only for toy-sized models, because computing them requires enumerating counterfactual scenarios. Scalable attribution methods like SHAP (or even causal SHAP) at least partially ignore the causal structure that generated the data, and can give answers that conflict with a careful causal analysis. We close this gap with Probabilistic Causal Impact (PCI). PCI builds on actual causality and on Pearl's notions of probability of necessity and sufficiency, but recasts the question of explainability as an estimation problem on a probabilistic causal model that is easily approximated via Monte Carlo. By specifying a distribution over"candidate explanations,"a distribution over counterfactual values, and a scoring function, PCI provides tractable, causally grounded, graded explanations, generalizing AC and Pearl's probability of causation as degenerate cases. We evaluate PCI in synthetic and real-world examples, spanning consistency checks with AC, scaling experiments, complex continuous-valued dynamical systems, and a real-world deployed causal machine learning model trained on millions of datapoints.
Rafal Urbaniak, Sam Witty, Daniel Waxman et al.· 0 citations
In the natural sciences, symmetries and cause-effect relationships are ubiquitous. Yet for complex machine-learning tasks, like world-modeling in reinforcement learning, they appear difficult to harness. We propose a formal description of statistical systems based on symmetries in data leaving causal mechanisms invariant. The result is an abstract, simple and general mathematical language for causal reasoning. This paper provides formal descriptions of models and queries, setting up this language, and the formal infrastructure and strategies for their mathematically rigorous identification from data within this formalism. This approach reproduces and matches standard theoretical results on IID data and transport of experimental and non-experimental data. But its main purpose is to unify and substantially extend the scope of causal reasoning, in going beyond IID data and in approaching complex causal queries not captured by do- or soft-interventions. This new perspective on causally relevant aspects of data-modeling additionally sheds new light on well-known structures like c-components or hedges but also includes aspects of missing data and is inherently well-suited for the description of transfer and robustness properties.
Martin Rabel, Jakob Runge· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
