Unsupervised Causal Abstractions Discovery

Causal discovery, the problem of inferring the direction of causality, is generally ill-posed. We use the language of structural causal models (SCM) to show that assuming that the causal relations are acyclic and invariant across multiple environments (e.g., the way minimum wage affects employment rate is stable across different geographical regions), \textit{only} two auxiliary environments are sufficient to infer the causal graph for arbitrary nonlinear mechanisms. Moreover, we demonstrate that this implies identifiability of the SCM functional mechanisms: as a corollary, we show that \textit{two} auxiliary environments are sufficient to guarantee correct counterfactual inference. We empirically support our theoretical results on synthetic data.

A central goal of science is to produce valid explanations of complex systems: high-level causal accounts that faithfully reflect the behavior of lower-level mechanisms. Yet no consensus exists on how to measure whether a proposed high-level explanation is actually valid. We introduce a benchmark of ten complex systems spanning both discrete and continuous state spaces, as well as static and dynamical regimes, each equipped with consensual ground-truth causal explanations and invalid contrastive conditions. Within a unified causal abstraction framework, we systematically evaluate over thirty candidate metrics drawn from observational, functional, information-theoretic, and causal families. Our results show that only the latter reliably discriminates valid from invalid abstractions, and only when incorporating faithfulness testing over unmapped variables. Building on these findings, we introduce the Causal Abstraction Error (CAE), a continuous validity metric with an explicit faithfulness test, which passes all discrimination tests across every system and can converge with as few as 30 sampled interventions. We offer it as a general-purpose metric for the discovery and validation of high-level explanations.

Recent work on causal abstraction, in particular graphical approaches focusing on causal structure between clusters of variables, aims to summarize a high-dimensional causal structure in terms of a low-dimensional one. Existing methods for learning such summaries from data assume that both the high- and low-dimensional structures are acyclic, which is helpful for causal effect identification and reasoning but excludes many high-dimensional models and thus limits applicability. We show that in the linear non-Gaussian (LiNG) setting, the high-dimensional acyclicity assumption can be relaxed while still allowing recovery of a low-dimensional causal directed acyclic graph (DAG). We further connect identifiability of this low-dimensional DAG to existing results: LiNG models with cycles are observationally identifiable only up to an equivalence class whose members differ by reversals of directed cycles; our low-dimensional DAG, which is invariant across all members of a given equivalence class, thus forms a natural representative of the class. While existing approaches for learning this observational equivalence class over high-dimensional variables have exponential time complexity, our low-dimensional summary is learned in worst-case cubic time and comes with explicit bounds on the sample complexity. We provide open source code and experiments on synthetic data to corroborate our theoretical results.