Dictionary Based Pattern Entropy for Causal Direction Discovery

We introduce Causal Computational Asymmetry (CCA), a principle for causal direction identification based on optimization dynamics in which one neural network is trained to predict $Y$ from $X$ and another to predict $X$ from $Y$, and the direction that converges faster is inferred to be causal. Under the additive noise model $Y = f(X) + \varepsilon$ with $\varepsilon \perp X$ and $f$ nonlinear and injective, we establish a formal asymmetry: in the reverse direction, residuals remain statistically dependent on the input regardless of approximation quality, inducing a strictly higher irreducible loss floor and non-separable gradient noise in the optimization dynamics, so that the reverse model requires strictly more gradient steps in expectation to reach any fixed loss threshold; consequently, the forward (causal) direction converges in fewer expected optimization steps. CCA operates in optimization-time space, distinguishing it from methods such as RESIT, IGCI, and SkewScore that rely on statistical independence or distributional asymmetries, and proper z-scoring of both variables is required for valid comparison of convergence rates. On synthetic benchmarks, CCA achieves 26/30 correct causal identifications across six neural architectures, including 30/30 on sine and exponential data-generating processes. We further embed CCA into a broader framework termed Causal Compression Learning (CCL), which integrates graph structure learning, causal information compression, and policy optimization, with all theoretical guarantees formally proved and empirically validated on synthetic datasets.

Identification of causal directionality in bivariate numerical data is a fundamental research problem with important practical implications. This paper presents two alternative methods to identify direction of causation by considering conditional distributions: (1) Anticipated Asymmetric Geometries (AAG) and (2) Monotonicity Index (MI). The AAG method compares the actual conditional distributions to anticipated ones along two variables. Different comparison metrics, such as Pearson correlation, cosine distance, Hellinger distance, Jaccard index, Jeffreys divergence, K-L divergence, K-S distance, MAE, MSE, mutual information, and Wasserstein distance have been evaluated. Anticipated distributions have been projected as normal based on dual response statistics: mean and standard deviation. The MI method compares the calculated monotonicity indexes of the gradients of conditional distributions along two axes and exhibits count of gradient sign changes. Both methods assume stochastic properties of the bivariate data and exploit anticipated unimodality of conditional distributions of the effect. The proposed methods are straightforward and include only a limited number of hyperparameters that affect the accuracy of the identification. For a given set of hyperparameters, both the AAG and MI methods provide a unique, deterministic solution. To address sensitivity to hyperparameters, tuning has been done by utilizing a full factorial Design of Experiment. It turns out that the AAG method outperforms MI, achieving top weighted accuracies of 82.7% with simple tuning and 84.4% with size-adaptive tuning, compared with 81.6% for GRCI or 82.0% for CAREFL-H on the 99 pairs of the Tubingen real-world cause-effect examples. To evaluate the decisiveness of the identification method, a decision tree was fitted on the input data's symmetrical bivariate statistics to detect misclassified cases.

Causal discovery has shifted from data-centric methods to hybrid strategies that integrate semantic knowledge from experts or large language models (LLMs). Such external information is vital for identifying causal structures beyond the Markov Equivalence Class (MEC), which data alone cannot resolve. However, expert availability is often limited, and LLMs frequently misidentify causal directions in specialized domains. To overcome such shortcomings, we propose a tag-based approach that leverages semantically meaningful labels while deriving causal directionality directly from data. Using variable-level tag assignments from available sources (e.g., LLMs), our tags for DAGs method learns from identifiable data structures to extract higher-level causal relations. These are then used to orient undirected edges, enabling causal discovery to move beyond the MEC without reliance on fallible external knowledge.