cs.AIJun 3, 2026

Trivium: Temporal Regret as a First-Class Objective for Causal-Memory Controllers

Authors: Edward Y. Chang

Organizations: Computer Science Stanford University

Abstract

Many current agentic systems and LLM pipelines correct mistakes by optimizing outcome reward. This addresses only the what of failure: when an outcome diverges from prediction, the why and when of the mismatch are not systematically logged, reviewed, or corrected, so the same error can recur episode after episode. We argue that this is a structural problem, not merely a model-capacity one. We propose long-horizon temporal regret as a first-class objective alongside outcome regret and epistemic regret over the working causal model. Temporal regret captures when failure persists: how long a miscalibrated causal model is tolerated before correction. Epistemic regret captures why failure persists: residual uncertainty or error in the working causal model. Together, the three regrets give a falsifiable account of what, why, and when a long-lived agent can fail. Modeling the agent as a stream of E episodes, we prove three conditional results under explicit causal-probing, persistence, and detectability assumptions. First, under observationally equivalent confounding, outcome-only learning cannot distinguish causal from spurious structure without an intervention channel, so temporal miscalibration can persist linearly even after outcome regret is driven to zero. Second, with a persistent causal log and budgeted probes, total probe complexity is logarithmic in the episode horizon, inducing O(log E) temporal regret. Third, under K detectable change-points, the rate extends to O(K log E). We instantiate Trivium and pre-register five falsifiable predictions. On CausalBench-Seq, Trivium follows the predicted logarithmic envelope while outcome-only baselines grow linearly. A pilot real-LLM stream provides preliminary external-validity evidence across one full E = 500 run and three E = 100 frontier-model pilots. Self-learning here means revising an external causal model, not retraining LLM weights.

Explore similar work

CardsList
Jun 6, 2026cs.LG

Causal Agent Replay: Counterfactual Attribution for LLM-Agent Failures

When an LLM agent fails -- issues a refund it should not have, calls the wrong tool, leaks data -- existing tooling answers what happened (observability) or whether it passed (evaluation), but not which step caused the failure. The obvious heuristics are wrong: the step that executes the harmful action is usually not the step that decided on it, and LLM-judge attribution is correlational and unreliable (state-of-the-art step-level accuracy on the Who&When benchmark is about 14%). We present Causal Agent Replay (CAR), which answers the question by intervention: it models an agent run as a structural causal model, applies a do-operation to a step, and re-executes the trajectory forward under the same stochastic policy, measuring the shift in the outcome distribution. We define an intervention algebra over agent steps, a single-step contrastive estimator whose point-of-commitment rule resolves a confound specific to stochastic run-forward, and a budget-bounded Monte-Carlo Shapley estimator that splits credit across interacting steps. Every effect is reported with confidence intervals. We validate against synthetic structural causal models with planted ground truth: the contrastive estimator recovers the pivotal step, and Shapley recovers a two-step interaction (0.44, 0.45, ~0; efficiency sum 0.909 versus the analytic 0.91). CAR is open source and runs on hosted or free local models.
Jaineet Shah
Step-Level Failure AttributionCausal InterventionLarge Language Model AgentsStructural Causal ModelContrastive Learning
AskPDF
May 26, 2026cs.AI

Why LLMs Fail at Causal Discovery and How Interventional Agents Escape

Causal discovery is a cornerstone of scientific reasoning, yet whether large language models can perform it reliably remains an open question. Recent benchmarks show that even fine-tuned models plateau on simple causal graphs and degrade as complexity grows, but why they fail has not been established. We prove the failure is fundamental: supervised fine-tuning, direct preference optimization, and in-context learning all produce predictors that cannot distinguish between causal graphs generating similar observational data, and any attempt to do so requires the model's internal representations to grow unboundedly, violating the very conditions under which these methods work. We formalize this as a kernel obstruction theorem, establishing that the limitation is intrinsic to the learning paradigm, \emph{not any particular model or dataset}. We propose Agentic Causal Bayesian Optimization (A-CBO), wherein a frozen language model serves as an interventional oracle answering targeted queries about intervention effects, while an external Bayesian loop concentrates beliefs over candidate graphs in logarithmically many rounds. Because the decision operates outside the space where the obstruction applies, A-CBO provably converges while the underlying model remains unchanged. On Corr2Cause, A-CBO matches fine-tuned baselines without any training. On Extended Corr2Cause, a new benchmark scaling to 24 variables with 18K test samples, A-CBO significantly outperforms both fine-tuning and preference optimization, with the advantage growing
Amartya Roy, Sonali Parbhoo
Causal DiscoveryLarge Language Models FailFinetuningBayesian Inference ApproachesBayesian Optimization
AskPDF
May 17, 2026cs.AI

Causal Intervention-Based Memory Selection for Long-Horizon LLM Agents

Long-horizon LLM agents rely on persistent memory to support interactions across sessions, yet existing memory systems often retrieve context using semantic similarity or broad history inclusion, treating retrieved memories as uniformly useful. This assumption is fragile because memories may be topically related while remaining irrelevant, stale, or misleading. We propose Causal Memory Intervention (CMI), a causal memory-selection technique that estimates how candidate memories affect the model's answer under controlled interventions, selecting memories that improve task performance while suppressing unstable, irrelevant, or harmful ones. To evaluate this setting, we introduce Causal-LoCoMo, a causally annotated benchmark derived from long conversational data, where each example contains a user request, a structured memory bank, useful memories, irrelevant distractors, and synthetic harmful memories. We compare CMI against vector, graph, reflection, summary, full-history, and no-memory baselines. Results show that CMI achieves a stronger balance between answer quality and robustness to misleading memory, suggesting that reliable long-term memory requires selecting context based on causal usefulness rather than relevance alone. The full framework, benchmark construction code, and experimental pipeline are available at https://github.com/Saksham4796/causal-memory-intervention.
Saksham Sahai Srivastava
Biological MemoryLong-Horizon AgentsCausal Intervention
AskPDF