Organizations: Department of Systems Biology, Columbia University · Irving Institute for Cancer Dynamics, Columbia University · Department of Computer Science, Columbia University · Department of Biomedical Engineering, Columbia University · Data Science Institute, Columbia University
Observational causal discovery is only identifiable up to the Markov equivalence class. While interventions can reduce this ambiguity, in practice interventions are often soft with multiple unknown targets. In many realistic scenarios, only a single intervention regime is observed. We propose a scalable causal discovery model for paired observational and interventional settings with shared underlying causal structure and unknown soft interventions. The model aggregates subset-level PDAGs and applies contrastive cross-regime orientation rules to construct a globally consistent maximal PDAG under Meek closure, enabling generalization to both in-distribution and out-of-distribution settings. Theoretically, we prove that our model is sound with respect to a restricted Ψ equivalence class induced solely by the information available in the subset-restricted setting. We further show that the model asymptotically recovers the corresponding identifiable PDAG and can orient additional edges compared to non-contrastive subset-restricted methods. Experiments on synthetic data demonstrate improved causal structure recovery, generalization to unseen graphs with held-out causal mechanisms, and scalability to larger graphs, with ablations supporting the theoretical results.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: F1 (harmonic mean of precision and recall) and SHD (structural hamming distance) for state-of-the-art methods that only perform in distribution graph prediction on 20 nodes 20 edges. 10 graphs were generated using the polynomial mechanism. The horizontal red dashed line indicates mean across 10 graphs on predictions from running classic causal discovery baseline.
Figure 2: F1 and SHD for state-of-the-art methods compared to SCONE on predictions over 10 graphs with 20 nodes 20 edges, 20 nodes 30 edges, and 20 graphs for 50 nodes 50 edges. SEA-FCI obtains an F1 score of 0.0 in the 20 node 20 edge example, and is represented by a circle on the bottom of the axis.
Model
SHD ↓
F1 ↑
Scone
126.7±25.0
0.237±0.046
Avici
131.3±18.0
0.100±0.042
Dcd-Fg
1001.3±537.9
0.052±0.011
Sea (FCI)
3178.8±425.2
0.022±0.004
Sea (GIES)
1797.2±296.6
0.022±0.004
Table 1: Comparison of causal discovery methods on graphs with N=100 nodes and E=100 edges. Results are averaged over 20 graphs (mean ± std).
N
E
Model
SHD ↓
F1 ↑
Scone
39.0±9.7
0.469±0.143
20
40
Scone-NB
39.6±9.0
0.453±0.123
Scone
53.85 ± 11.60
0.424 ± 0.102
50
50
Scone-NB
56.60 ± 10.79
0.393 ± 0.092
Table 2: Comparison of SCONE with and without using orientation rules. Results are averaged over 20 graphs (mean ± std). SCONE-NB is the model with bias head ablated and thus do not incur rules.
N
E
Model
SHD ↓
F1 ↑
Scone
39.0±9.7
0.469±0.143
20
40
Scone-NC
48.6±9.3
0.341±0.136
Scone
53.85±11.60
0.424±0.102
50
50
Scone-NC
66.55±9.1
0.322±0.076
Table 3: Comparison of SCONE with and without using contrastive features. Results for N=20 are averaged over 10 graphs and N=50 over 20 graphs (mean ± std). Scone-NC is the model with contrastive features ablated.
Appendix figures & tables7 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 3: Precision, recall, F1 and SHD for state-of-the-art methods that only perform in-distribution graph prediction on 20 nodes 20 edges. 10 graphs were generated using the polynomial mechanism. The horizontal red dashed line indicates mean across 10 graphs on predictions from running Polynomial-BIC baseline only.
Model
SHD ↓
F1 ↑
Precision ↑
Recall ↑
Scone
14.6±4.4
0.655±0.094
0.694±0.098
0.624±0.106
Notears
19.7±7.9
0.675±0.073
0.544±0.081
0.899±0.058
Dcdi-Dsf
63.9±14.9
0.195±0.048
0.396±0.069
0.130±0.036
Dcd-Fg
86.7±25.1
0.157±0.057
0.101±0.035
0.377±0.190
Poly-BIC CD
22.1
0.524
0.511
0.546
Appendix
Table 4: Comparison of causal discovery methods on polynomial in-distribution graphs with N=20 nodes and E=20 edges. Results are averaged over 10 graphs (mean ± std).
Figure 4: Precision, recall, F1 and SHD for state-of-the-art methods compared to SCONE on predictions over 10 graphs with 20 nodes 20 edges, 20 nodes 30 edges and 20 graphs for 50 nodes 50 edges. SEA-FCI obtains a precision, recall and F1 score of 0.0 in the 20 node 20 edge example, and is represented by a circle on the bottom of the axis.
N
E
Model
SHD ↓
F1 ↑
Precision ↑
Recall ↑
Scone
16.3±3.7
0.571±0.098
0.610±0.110
0.537±0.091
20
20
Avici
23.3±6.2
0.319±0.099
0.346±0.098
0.310±0.127
Notears
18.0±4.6
0.468±0.105
0.434±0.091
0.517±0.139
Dcd-Fg
98.8±22.2
0.155±0.044
0.096±0.024
0.450±0.183
Dcdi-Dsf
70.3±13.5
0.221±0.082
0.512±0.181
0.142±0.057
Sea (FCI)
21.9±2.0
0.000±0.000
0.000±0.000
0.000±0.000
Appendix
Table 5: Comparison of causal discovery methods across graph sizes. Results are averaged over 10 graphs for N=20 and 20 graphs for N=50 (mean ± std).
Model
SHD ↓
F1 ↑
Precision ↑
Recall ↑
Scone
126.7±25.0
0.237±0.046
0.345±0.074
0.186±0.046
Avici
131.3±18.0
0.100±0.042
0.210±0.082
0.068±0.031
Dcd-Fg
1001.3±537.9
0.052±0.011
0.030±0.008
0.230±0.076
Sea (FCI)
3178.8±425.2
0.022±0.004
0.012±0.002
0.325±0.056
Sea (GIES)
1797.2±296.6
0.022±0.004
0.012±0.002
0.185±0.044
Appendix
Table 6: Comparison of SHD, F1, precision and recall for causal discovery methods on graphs with N=100 nodes and E=100 edges. Results are averaged over 20 graphs (mean ± std).
N
E
Model
SHD ↓
F1 ↑
Precision ↑
Recall ↑
Scone
39.0±9.7
0.469±0.143
0.473±0.138
0.466±0.153
20
40
Scone-NB
39.6±9.0
0.453±0.123
0.460±0.126
0.449±0.125
Scone
53.85±11.60
0.424±0.102
0.455±0.102
0.398±0.103
50
50
Scone-NB
56.60±10.79
0.393±0.092
0.424±0.094
0.368±0.092
Appendix
Table 7: Comparison of SCONE with and without orientation rules. Results for N=20 are averaged over 10 graphs and N=50 over 20 graphs (mean ± std). Scone-NB ablates the contrastive bias heads.
N
E
Model
SHD ↓
F1 ↑
Precision ↑
Recall ↑
Scone
39.0±9.7
0.469±0.143
0.473±0.138
0.466±0.153
20
40
Scone-NC
48.6±9.3
0.341±0.136
0.350±0.136
0.335±0.139
Scone
53.85±11.60
0.424±0.102
0.455±0.102
0.398±0.103
50
50
Scone-NC
66.55±9.1
0.322±0.076
0.350±0.076
0.300±0.077
Appendix
Table 8: Comparison of SCONE with and without any contrastive features. Results for N=20 are averaged over 10 graphs and N=50 over 20 graphs (mean ± std). Scone-NC ablates the contrastive features in the model.
Inferring the structure of directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) from data is a central challenge in causal discovery, particularly in modern high-dimensional settings where large-scale interventional data are increasingly available. While interventional data can improve identifiability, existing methods remain limited by soft acyclicity constraints, leading to optimization over invalid cyclic graphs, numerical instability, and reduced scalability. We introduce PACER (Perturbation-driven Acyclic Causal Edge Recovery), a scalable framework for causal discovery that guarantees acyclicity by construction. PACER parameterizes a distribution over DAGs through a joint model of variable permutations and edge probabilities, enabling direct optimization over valid causal structures without surrogate penalties. The framework supports a unified likelihood-based treatment of observational and interventional data, flexible conditional density models, and the incorporation of structural prior knowledge. For linear-Gaussian mechanisms, we derive closed-form expressions for the expected interventional log-likelihood and its gradients, yielding substantial computational gains. Empirically, PACER matches or exceeds state-of-the-art methods on protein signaling and large-scale genetic perturbation benchmarks, while scaling efficiently to networks with thousands of variables and achieving up to two orders of magnitude speedups over penalty-based differentiable approaches. These results demonstrate that exact and scalable causal discovery from high-dimensional perturbation data is achievable through principled search space design.
Ramon Viñas Torné, Sílvia Fàbregas Salazar, Soyon Park +4
Swiss Federal Technology Institute of Lausanne (EPFL), Switzerland · ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland · Cornell University, USA
Causal discovery from observational data is a fundamental yet challenging task in scientific research. While existing approaches are primarily based on conditional independence tests, structure scores, or restrictive functional assumptions, we propose Decoupled Causal Discovery (DCD), a novel decoupling-based perspective that does not rely on these methodologies. DCD directly identifies the Markov boundary (MB) by decoupling non-target variables via weighting functions, such that only variables within the MB preserve dependence with the target under the decoupled distribution. Building on this, DCD iteratively constructs the Completed Partially Directed Acyclic Graph (CPDAG) by exploiting structural asymmetries within the MBs. We establish the theoretical identifiability, soundness, and completeness of DCD. Empirical evaluations demonstrate that DCD achieves strong performance, particularly excelling in challenging noise regimes.
Zhengkang Guan, Fei Wu, Kun Kuang
College of Computer Science and Technology Zhejiang University
Causal discovery is challenging in general dynamical systems because, without strong structural assumptions, the underlying causal graph may not be identifiable even from interventional data. However, many real-world systems exhibit directional, cascade-like structure, in which components activate sequentially and upstream failures suppress downstream effects. We study causal discovery in such chain-reaction systems and show that the causal structure is uniquely identifiable from blocking interventions that prevent individual components from activating. We propose a minimal estimator with finite-sample guarantees, achieving exponential error decay and logarithmic sample complexity. Experiments on synthetic models and diverse chain-reaction environments demonstrate reliable recovery from a few interventions, while observational heuristics fail in regimes with delayed or overlapping causal effects.
Panayiotis Panayiotou, Özgür Şimşek
Department of Computer Science, University of Bath, UK