CRRL: A Causality-Based Reinforcement Learning Framework for Autonomous System Recovery

Causal inference provides a set of principles and tools that allow one to combine data and knowledge about an environment to reason with questions of counterfactual nature, i.e., what would have happened had reality been different, even when no data of this unrealized reality is currently available. Reinforcement learning provides methods to learn a policy that optimizes a specific measure (e.g., reward, regret) when the agent is deployed in an environment and pursues an exploratory, trial-and-error approach. These two disciplines have evolved independently and with virtually no interaction between them. We note that they operate over different aspects of the same building block, counterfactual relations, which makes them umbilically connected. Based on these observations, novel learning opportunities arise when this connection is explicitly acknowledged and mathematized. To realize this potential, we note that any environment where the RL agent is deployed can be decomposed as a collection of autonomous mechanisms with different causal invariances, parsimoniously modeled as a structural causal model; any standard RL setting implicitly encodes such a model. This formalization allows us to put under a unifying treatment different modes of learning, including online, off-policy, and causal calculus learning, which appear unrelated in the literature. However, these modalities are not exhaustive: we introduce several natural and pervasive classes of learning settings that entail novel dimensions of analysis. Specifically, we introduce and discuss through causal lenses generalized policy learning, where to intervene, imitation learning, and counterfactual learning. These tasks lead to a broader view of counterfactual learning and suggest great potential for studying causal inference and reinforcement learning side by side, which we call causal reinforcement learning (CRL).

Training reinforcement-learning agents directly on physical robots makes every fall costly, since a fall can damage the platform and cannot be undone like a simulator reset; the goal is therefore to minimize falls during training rather than trade them off against return, as constrained Markov decision process (MDP) formulations do. A standard mitigation hands control to a separate recovery policy whenever the agent leaves a designer-specified safe region (a subset of state space it should stay within), but the resulting mixed-policy rollouts silently bias every on-policy update, and the importance-sampling correction that would remove this bias is ill-defined whenever the recovery policy is deterministic. We address this bias with a drop-in modification of proximal policy optimization (PPO). Its core is an unbiased policy-gradient estimator that uses the score function only at safe timesteps and never evaluates the recovery policy's density, so it stays valid even when the recovery policy is deterministic, exactly where importance sampling breaks, and it empirically dominates importance sampling even when the recovery policy is stochastic. Because the recovery policy still makes credit assignment slow near the safe-region boundary, two further components accelerate learning: a closed-form value for recovery-triggering states when dynamics and recovery are deterministic, and an imitation loss that copies recovery actions only when recovery succeeds. On a three-environment, five-seed benchmark, the resulting algorithm reduces training-time falls by factors of 233x, 48x, and 26x on HalfCheetah, Ant, and Unitree Go1 over standard PPO, while matching or exceeding PPO's final reward, and on Ant, where the recovery policy is unreliable, it is the only method that reaches 80% of the best final reward.

A central goal of autonomous reinforcement learning is continuous policy training without external resets. However, existing paradigms largely depend on underlying environmental reversibility, a property absent in real world manipulation, where events such as pushing objects off tables or spilling granular substances cannot be undone. We introduce REVERSAL-BENCH, a benchmark that controls reversibility via a continuous parameter $ρ\in [0, 1]$ and provides a reset oracle, a ground-truth verification mechanism to test state recoverability across eight manipulation settings in five physics engines. Evaluating a broad spectrum of policy architectures, including standard actor-critic algorithms, safe RL, and specialized reset-free frameworks, reveals a sharp reversibility cliff: reset-free agents are consistently absorbed into irrecoverable states as $ρ$ increases, whereas episodic agents maintain steady learning. We see this failure mode across autonomous reset-free baselines and constrained RL. Because reset-free agents lack external resets, any transition into an irrecoverable state results in permanent absorption, leaving the agent trapped where further learning halts. We show that this absorption phenomenon persists in full physics simulations under learned manipulation policies. By evaluating against geometrically identical reversible counterparts, we confirm that this breakdown is causally driven by irreversibility rather than obstacle complexity. We release the benchmark suite, a large multi-simulator dataset labeled with recoverability and a reset oracle. We also evaluate a safety shield that intervenes before irreversible failures occur, showing that while recoverability can be predicted accurately, active recovery primarily succeeds only when the agent can physically steer clear of the trap