The do-operator is described graphically by deleting arrows into its targets and functionally by replacing their mechanisms with constants. To call these operations equivalent is not yet a mathematical statement: one returns a graph and remembers only the targets, whereas the other returns mechanisms and also remembers the imposed values. We make a dependency-level comparison precise for deterministic acyclic structural causal models with finitely many endogenous variables. If Graph(F) extracts the dependencies of a mechanism family F, our main theorem is Graph(Fι)=Surg(Graph(F),Tι). Thus replacing target mechanisms removes exactly the dependencies removed by graph surgery. For a model M=(G,F) whose graph may contain unused arrows, we characterize when the same equality holds with G in place of Graph(F); it holds for every intervention exactly when G records the dependencies of F exactly. We then define the intervened model, characterize its run, show how sequential interventions combine, and prove that an outcome depends only on interventions at its actual dependency ancestors. All principal results are machine-checked in an accompanying Lean 4 development.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: The correspondence of Theorem 3.1 . Replacing target mechanisms and extracting dependencies yields the same graph as extracting dependencies first and then performing surgery.
Figure 2: The outcome at Y is determined inside its ancestor set. The dashed, crossed arrows are removed by \doexpr(D=d) ; intervening on the downstream variable D cannot change Y .
The do-calculus defines a general system of inference for interventional queries, allowing causal quantities to be transformed through successive applications of its rules. This process induces a rich space of equivalent interventional expressions, but combining and ordering these rules remains challenging. In this work, we introduce derivation graphs, which represent how do-calculus rules are applied and combined, and characterize the full space of observational and interventional probabilities which are equivalent under the do-calculus. The structure of these graphs yields a simple procedure that uses at most four applications of do-calculus rules. Finally, we show how applying identification algorithms to equivalent causal queries produces multiple valid estimands for the same causal quantity, eventually yielding more efficient estimators.
Causal Bayesian networks (CBNs) and structural causal models (SCMs) are the dominant frameworks for graphical causal reasoning, but they cannot adequately represent all real-world causal systems. In particular, systems at equilibrium---where feedback mechanisms create cyclic causal dependencies---can exhibit causal semantics that are fundamentally incompatible with these frameworks: different interventions that enforce the same variable value may have different effects, rendering the standard ``perfect intervention'' do(X=x) ambiguous. We propose bipartite graphical causal models (BGCMs), in which the structure of a system of equations is encoded by a bipartite graph with variable and equation nodes. In this framework, a hard intervention do(fj:Xv=ξv) specifies which equation is replaced, which variable is targeted, and at what value---resolving the ambiguity of the standard notion. We demonstrate, through a detailed case study of a physical system, that this representation naturally corresponds to distinct real-world interventions. We formulate a Markov property in terms of a new graphical separation criterion (B-separation) that exploits the functional determinism inherent in the equations, and we extend it to settings with non-random inputs. We show how this gives rise to a do-calculus for reasoning about domain invariances. BGCMs strictly generalize CBNs and SCMs while retaining the ability to perform graphical causal reasoning.
Joris M. Mooij
Korteweg-De Vries Institute for Mathematics, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
This paper introduces a categorical account of infinitesimal causality in Frobenius Markov categories equipped with tangent-bundle semantics. IDC captures the infinitesimal layer in which interventions act as tangent deformations of copy/discard structure. Two distinct Frobenius structures interact: (1) the categorical Frobenius algebra on classical variables encoding copying, comparing, and discarding; and (2) the geometric Frobenius integrability condition, namely involutive closure of the intervention distribution, distinct from the algebraic Frobenius structure. Categorical causal sufficiency is defined as the compatibility of these two notions. A key observation is that, for structural causal models, infinitesimal causality is most naturally formulated in the slice of deterministic mechanisms over exogenous variables, with visible stochastic kernels obtained only after pushforward. Interventions are tangent vectors that deform the Frobenius copy/discard operations; their Lie brackets measure whether this deformation preserves classical information-flow structure. Pearl's do-calculus is used as a guiding example of intervention identities: ignoring irrelevant interventions corresponds to counit invariance, action/observation exchange to coproduct compatibility with pushforward, and independence to involutive bracket closure of the visible intervention distribution.
Sridhar Mahadevan
Adobe Research and University of Massachusetts, Amherst