Causal

Real-time interactive video generation requires low-latency, streaming, and controllable rollout. Existing autoregressive (AR) diffusion distillation methods have achieved strong results in the chunk-wise 4-step regime by distilling bidirectional base models into few-step AR students, but they remain limited by coarse response granularity and non-negligible sampling latency. In this paper, we study a more aggressive setting: frame-wise autoregression with only 1--2 sampling steps. In this regime, we identify the initialization of a few-step AR student as the key bottleneck: existing strategies are either target-misaligned, incapable of few-step generation, or too costly to scale. We propose \textbf{Causal Forcing++}, a principled and scalable pipeline that uses \emph{causal consistency distillation} (causal CD) for few-step AR initialization. The core idea is that causal CD learns the same AR-conditional flow map as causal ODE distillation, but obtains supervision from a single online teacher ODE step between adjacent timesteps, avoiding the need to precompute and store full PF-ODE trajectories. This makes the initialization both more efficient and easier to optimize. The resulting pipeline, \ours, surpasses the SOTA 4-step chunk-wise Causal Forcing under the \textit{\textbf{frame-wise 2-step setting}} by 0.1 in VBench Total, 0.3 in VBench Quality, and 0.335 in VisionReward, while reducing first-frame latency by 50% and Stage 2 training cost by \sim$$4\times. We further extend the pipeline to action-conditioned world model generation in the spirit of Genie3. Project Page: https://github.com/thu-ml/Causal-Forcing and https://github.com/shengshu-ai/minWM .

Causal inference, estimating causal effects from observational data, is a fundamental tool in many disciplines. Of particular importance across a variety of domains is the continuous treatment setting, where the variable of intervention has a continuous range. This setting is far less explored and represents a substantial shift from the binary treatment setting, with models needing to represent effects across a continuum of treatment values. In this paper, we present the first causal foundation model for the continuous treatment setting. Our model meta-learns the ability to predict causal effects across a wide variety of unseen tasks without additional training or fine-tuning. First, we design a novel prior over data-generating processes with continuous treatment variables in order to generate a rich causal training corpus. We then train a transformer to reconstruct individual treatment-response curves given only observational data, leveraging in-context learning to amortize expensive Bayesian posterior inference. Our model achieves state-of-the-art performance on individual treatment-response curve reconstruction tasks compared to causal models which are trained specifically for those tasks. Inference code (including trained model weights) can be found at https://github.com/layer6ai-labs/CCPFN-inference .

The Context-Compliance Regime in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) occurs when retrieved context dominates the final answer even when it conflicts with the model's parametric knowledge. Accuracy alone does not reveal how retrieved context causally shapes answers under such conflict. We introduce Context-Driven Decomposition (CDD), a belief-decomposition probe that operates at inference time and serves as an intervention mechanism for controlled retrieval conflict. Across Epi-Scale stress tests, TruthfulQA misconception injection, and cross-model reruns, CDD exposes three patterns. P1: context compliance is measurable in an upper-bound adversarial setting, where Standard RAG reaches 15.0% accuracy on TruthfulQA misconception injection (N=500). P2: adversarial accuracy gains transfer across model families -- CDD improves accuracy on Gemini-2.5-Flash and on Claude Haiku/Sonnet/Opus -- but rationale-answer causal coupling does not transfer. CDD reaches 64.1% mistake-injection causal sensitivity on Gemini-2.5-Flash, while sensitivities for all three Claude variants fall in the [-3%, +7%] range, suggesting that the Claude-side accuracy gains operate through a mechanism distinct from the explicit conflict-resolution trace. P3: explicit conflict decomposition improves robustness under temporal drift and noisy distractors, with CDD reaching 71.3% on temporal shifts and 69.9% on distractor evidence on the full Epi-Scale adversarial benchmark. These three patterns identify context-compliance as a structural axis along which standard RAG can be probed and intervened on, distinct from retrieval-quality or single-method robustness questions, and motivate releasing Epi-Scale for systematic study across model families and retrieval pipelines.

Large-scale pretraining on Earth observation imagery has yielded powerful representations of the natural and built environment. However, most existing geospatial foundation models do not directly model the structured socioeconomic covariates typically stored in tabular form. This modality gap limits their ability to capture the complete total environment, which is critical for reasoning about complex environmental, social, and health-related outcomes. In this work, we propose GeoViSTA (Geospatial Vision-Tabular Transformer), a vision-tabular architecture that learns unified geospatial embeddings from co-registered gridded imagery and tabular data. GeoViSTA utilizes bilateral cross-attention to exchange spatial and semantic information across modalities, guided by a geography-aware attention mechanism that aligns continuous image patches with irregular census-tract tokens. We train GeoViSTA with a self-supervised joint masked-autoencoding objective, forcing it to recover missing image patches and tabular rows using local spatial context and cross-modal cues. Empirically, GeoViSTA's unified embeddings improve linear probing performance on high-impact downstream tasks, outperforming baselines in predicting disease-specific mortality and fire hazard frequency across held-out regions. These results demonstrate that jointly modeling the physical environment alongside structured socioeconomic context yields highly transferable representations for holistic geospatial inference.

Probabilistic prediction systems often aggregate probability estimates from multiple models into a single decision. A common assumption is that if each model is individually calibrated, the aggregate prediction will also be well calibrated. We show that this assumption fails in multi-agent settings: individually calibrated predictors can become collectively miscalibrated when their predictions interact strategically, in the game-theoretic sense of Brier-optimal local response, even without deliberate coordination. This phenomenon arises naturally when agents are independently trained on overlapping data. We prove that under Brier-score-based aggregation with positively correlated beliefs, each agent's individually optimal report systematically underestimates the positive-class probability, yielding a Price of Anarchy greater than one whenever Cov(b_i, b_j) > 0. In a canonical setting (n = 5 agents, pairwise correlation = 0.5, base rate = 0.3), the empirically measured PoA in false-negative rate reaches 7.25x. In contrast, VCG-based aggregation aligns incentives by rewarding marginal contribution, achieving dominant-strategy incentive compatibility and near-optimal performance. Experiments on three real-world datasets (NSL-KDD, UNSW-NB15, Credit Card Fraud) show that VCG provides strong robustness while maintaining comparable accuracy. It performs particularly well in data-sparse and adversarial settings, and adaptive weighting further improves performance under distribution shift.

Comparative evaluation of multiple dynamic treatment policies is essential for healthcare and policy decisions, yet conventional longitudinal causal inference methods estimate each in isolation, preventing information sharing across counterfactuals. We demonstrate that this separate estimation paradigm induces a structurally uncontrolled second-order bias, inflating finite-sample variance even after standard debiasing with longitudinal targeted maximum likelihood estimation(LTMLE). To address this, we propose a policy-aware reparameterization of Iterative Conditional Expectation (ICE) Q-functions that enables joint estimation through shared representations. We implement this approach in the Policy-Encoded Q Network (PEQ-Net), an architecture centered on a shared policy encoder. The encoder is trained using kernel mean embeddings, ensuring that the learned representation space reflects population-level policy dissimilarities. After applying an LTMLE correction step, we prove this design imposes a structural constraint on the second-order remainder, thereby stabilizing finite-sample variance. Experiments on semi-synthetic datasets demonstrate that PEQ-Net consistently outperforms existing ICE-based methods, achieving substantial reductions in root-mean-square error, particularly when evaluating closely related policies.

We introduce and analyze Target-Induced Loss Tilting (TILT) for unsupervised domain adaptation under covariate shift. It is based on a novel objective function that decomposes the source predictor as $f+b$, fits $f+b$ on labeled source data while simultaneously penalizing the auxiliary component $b$ on unlabeled target inputs. The resulting fit $f$ is deployed as the final target predictor. At the population level, we show that this target-side penalty implicitly induces relative importance weighting at the population level, but in terms of an estimand $b^*_f$ that is self-localized to the current error, and remains uniformly bounded for any source-target pair (even those with disjoint supports). We prove a general finite-sample oracle inequality on the excess risk, and use it to give an end-to-end guarantee for training with sparse ReLU networks. Experiments on controlled regression problems and shifted CIFAR-100 distillation show that TILT improves target-domain performance over source-only training, exact importance weighting, and relative density-ratio baselines, with a stable dependence on the regularization parameter.

End-to-end autonomous driving, which bypasses traditional modular pipelines by directly predicting future trajectories from sensor inputs, has recently achieved substantial progress. However, existing methods often overlook the causal inter-dependencies in ego-vehicle planning, ignoring the reciprocal relations between the ego vehicle and surrounding agents. This causal oversight leads to inconsistent and unreliable trajectory predictions, especially in interaction-critical scenarios where ego decisions and neighboring agent behaviors must be reasoned about jointly. To address this limitation, we propose CaAD, a Causality-aware end-to-end Autonomous Driving framework that captures these dependencies within a shared latent scene representation. First, we propose an ego-centric joint-causal modeling module that builds on the marginal prediction branch, and learns causal dependencies between the ego vehicle and interaction-relevant agents. Second, we employ a causality-aware policy alignment stage implemented with joint-mode embeddings to align the stochastic ego policy with planning-oriented closed-loop feedback computed from surrounding traffic and map context. On the Bench2Drive and NAVSIM benchmarks, CaAD demonstrates strong closed-loop planning performance, achieving a Driving Score of 87.53 and Success Rate of 71.81 on Bench2Drive, and a PDMS of 91.1 on NAVSIM. The project page is available at https://moonseokha.github.io/CaAD/.

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.

Selection bias is pervasive in observational studies. For example, large scale biobanks data can exhibit ``healthy volunteer bias'' when respondents are healthier and of higher socio-economic status than the population they are meant to represent. Recovering causal effects from such sub-population is an important problem in causal inference, as estimating average treatment effects (ATE) from selected populations can result in a severely biased estimate of the ATE from the whole population. In this paper, we investigate the identifiability of the ATE under selection bias. We provide necessary and sufficient conditions for ATE identifiability, leveraging weak assumptions on probability classes to characterize propensity score and selection probability. Compared to previous works, our results extend existing graphical identifiability criteria and offer a more comprehensive understanding of causal effect identification with strictly weaker conditions in the presence of selection bias.

Responsibility allocation -- determining the extent to which agents are accountable for outcomes -- is a fundamental challenge in the design and analysis of multi-agent systems. In this work, we model such systems as concurrent stochastic multi-player games and introduce a notion of retrospective (backward) counterfactual responsibility, which quantifies an agent's accountability for outcomes resulting from a given strategy profile. To allocate responsibility among agents, we utilise the Shapley value and formally show that this method satisfies key desirable properties, including fairness and consistency. Building on this foundation, we propose a formal framework that supports both verification and strategic reasoning in responsibility-aware multi-agent systems. Furthermore, by adopting Nash equilibrium as the solution concept, we demonstrate how to compute stable strategy profiles in which agents trade off responsibility against expected reward.

The instrumental-variables (IV) setting is standard for partial identification of causal effects when unobserved confounding makes point identification impossible. Existing approaches face methodological bottlenecks: closed-form bound estimands are required -- e.g., Balke-Pearl equations in binary IV -- and even when available, designing accurate estimators requires manual effort tailored to each estimand. While direct Bayesian inference of the causal effects, instead of the bounds, circumvents these challenges, it is often computationally intensive and suffers from high prior sensitivity or under-dispersed posteriors. As a remedy, we introduce IV-ICL, an amortized Bayesian in-context learning method that learns the marginal posterior distribution of the causal effects directly and derives bounds as its quantiles. Unlike standard variational inference that optimizes exclusive KL divergence, amortized Bayesian inference minimizes the expected inclusive KL, a mass-covering objective. We empirically observe that optimizing inclusive KL can recover the entire identified set across diverse data-generating processes, while exclusive-KL (e.g. with variational inference) of the same Bayesian formulation collapses onto a single mode and fails to cover the identified set. We evaluate IV-ICL on synthetic and semi-synthetic IV benchmarks and show it produces intervals that are more reliably valid and more informative compared to efficient semi-parametric, Bayesian, and plug-in baselines, at 20-500x lower inference time. Beyond methodology, we propose a procedure to convert randomized controlled trials into IV benchmarks with provably preserved ground-truth causal effects that enables a more realistic evaluation of partial-identification methods.

Experimental design has emerged as a powerful approach for improving the sample efficiency of A/B testing, yet existing designs rely critically on correctly specified models. We study robust sequential experimental design under model misspecification and develop a unified framework that covers both contextual bandit and dynamic settings. Theoretically, we prove that our design bounds the worst-case mean squared error of the estimated treatment effect. Empirically, we demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach using synthetic and real-world datasets from a leading technology company.

Large language models can extract local causal claims from text, but those claims become more useful when organized as persistent, navigable world models rather than as flat summaries. We introduce PROMETHEUS, a framework that turns retrieved literature, filings, reviews, reports, agent traces, source data, code, simulations, and scientific models into causal atlases: sheaf-like families of local causal predictive-state models over an explicit cover of a research substrate. Each local region contains causal episodes, structured claim tables, predictive tests, support statistics, and provenance; restriction maps compare overlapping regions; gluing diagnostics expose agreement, drift, contradiction, and underdetermination. The resulting Topos World Model is not a single universal graph. It is a research instrument for navigating what a corpus says, where it says it, how strongly it is supported, and where local claims fail to assemble into a coherent global view. Three literature-atlas case studies -- ocean-temperature impacts on marine populations, GLP-1 weight-loss evidence, and resveratrol/red-wine health-benefit claims -- illustrate deep causal research from text with explicit locality, evidence, persistent state, and gluing tension. Four grounded-counterfactual case studies -- a Nature Climate Change microplastics forcing paper, an Indus Valley hydrology paper with VIC-derived figure data and model code, the canonical Sachs protein-signaling study with single-cell perturbation data, and a Nature singing-mouse study with MAPseq projection matrices -- show a stronger mode: when a paper ships source data, simulation outputs, or code, PROMETHEUS can evaluate a counterfactual against that scientific substrate and then rebuild the sheaf world model around the

Single-arm trials are an important study design for evaluating drug efficacy and safety without enrolling patients into a control arm. Although they do not provide the gold-standard evidence of randomized controlled trials, they are increasingly used in clinical development as they offer an efficient, ethical, and practical alternative. A wide variety of approaches can be used to construct control comparators and estimate treatment effects, from fixed comparators informed by clinical knowledge to data-based and model-based patient-level comparators, also known as synthetic controls. Powerful and flexible machine learning models can allow outcome-model-based synthetic controls to overcome key limitations of direct data-based approaches, yield more robust estimates of treatment effects, and provide a principled way to incorporate corrections or encode additional assumptions when external data are not directly comparable. In this work, we argue that outcome-model-based synthetic control arms are an important tool for single-arm trials. We focus on digital twins, personalized predictions of disease progression generated from machine learning models trained on historical datasets, which naturally leverage these flexible approaches. We review doubly robust estimators, present power and sample size formulas, and discuss trade-offs in selecting historical data for training and analysis. We also outline practical considerations for deploying digital twins within the framework of recent FDA draft guidance on the use of artificial intelligence in drug development. Finally, we reanalyze data from trials in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and Huntington's disease to demonstrate the proposed methods.

Autoregressive video generation aims at real-time, open-ended synthesis. Yet, cinematic storytelling is not merely the endless extension of a single scene; it requires progressing through evolving events, viewpoint shifts, and discrete shot boundaries. Existing autoregressive models often struggle in this setting. Trained primarily for short-horizon continuation, they treat long sequences as extended single shots, inevitably suffering from motion stagnation and semantic drift during long rollouts. To bridge this gap, we introduce CausalCine, an interactive autoregressive framework that transforms multi-shot video generation into an online directing process. CausalCine generates causally across shot changes, accepts dynamic prompts on the fly, and reuses context without regenerating previous shots. To achieve this, we first train a causal base model on native multi-shot sequences to learn complex shot transitions prior to acceleration. We then propose Content-Aware Memory Routing (CAMR), which dynamically retrieves historical KV entries according to attention-based relevance scores rather than temporal proximity, preserving cross-shot coherence under bounded active memory. Finally, we distill the causal base model into a few-step generator for real-time interactive generation. Extensive experiments demonstrate that CausalCine significantly outperforms autoregressive baselines and approaches the capability of bidirectional models while unlocking the streaming interactivity of causal generation. Demo available at https://yihao-meng.github.io/CausalCine/

Random delays weaken the temporal correspondence between actions and subsequent state feedback, making it difficult for agents to identify the true propagation process of action effects. In cross-task scenarios, changes in task objectives and reward formulations further reduce the reusability of previously acquired task knowledge. To address this problem, this paper proposes a transferable delay-aware reinforcement learning method based on implicit causal graph modeling. The proposed method uses a field-node encoder to represent high-dimensional observations as latent states with node-level semantics, and employs a message-passing mechanism to characterize dynamic causal dependencies among nodes, thereby learning transferable structured representations and environment dynamics knowledge. On this basis, imagination-driven behavior learning and planning are incorporated to optimize policies in the latent space, enabling cross-task knowledge transfer and rapid adaptation. Experimental results show that the proposed method outperforms baseline methods on DMC continuous control tasks with random delays. Cross-task transfer experiments further demonstrate that the learned structured representations and dynamics knowledge can be effectively transferred to new tasks and significantly accelerate policy adaptation.

Time Series Foundation Models (TSFMs) have recently achieved state-of-the-art performance, often outperforming supervised models in zero-shot settings. Recent TSFM architectures, such as Chronos-2 and TabPFN-TS, aim to integrate covariates. In this paper, we design controlled experiments based on simple target-covariate relationships to assess this integration capability. Our results show that TabPFN-TS captures these relationships more effectively than Chronos-2, especially for short horizons, suggesting that the strong benchmark performance of Chronos-2 does not automatically translate into optimal modeling of simple covariate-target dependencies.

Automatic misinformation detection performs well when deception is visible in what an article explicitly states. However, some misinformation articles remain locally coherent and only become misleading once compared with contemporaneous reports that supply background facts the article omits. We study this omission-relevant setting and observe that current omission-aware approaches typically either attach retrieved context as auxiliary evidence or infer a categorical omission signal, leaving the specific missing fact implicit. We propose \emph{Latent Causal Void} (LCV), a retrieval-guided detector that explicitly reconstructs the missing fact for each target sentence and uses it as a textual cross-source relation in graph reasoning. Concretely, LCV retrieves temporally aligned context articles, asks a frozen instruction-tuned large language model to generate a short missing-context description for each sentence--article pair, and feeds the resulting relation text into a heterograph over target sentences and context articles. On the bilingual benchmark of Sheng et al., LCV improves over the strongest omission-aware baseline by $2.56$ and $2.84$ macro-F1 points on the English and Chinese splits, respectively. The results indicate that modeling the missing cross-source fact itself, rather than only attaching retrieved evidence or predicting an omission signal, is a useful representation for omission-aware misinformation detection.

Instruction-tuned language models exhibit behavioural fairness in high-stakes decisions while retaining biased associations in their internal representations. However, whether these suppressed representations can affect model outputs - and whether such causal potency is symmetric across demographic groups - remains unknown. We investigate the use of open-weight models for mortgage underwriting using matched applications that differ only in racially-associated names and reveal a critical disconnect: models show no output-level bias, yet retain and amplify demographic representations across model layers. Through activation steering and novel cross-layer interventions, we demonstrate that this suppressed information is decision-relevant: when reinjected at critical layers, it produces near-complete decision reversals. Critically, this latent bias is asymmetric - steering interventions affect decisions in one demographic direction, while producing minimal effects in reverse - and susceptible to adversarial prompt engineering and parameter-efficient fine-tuning. These findings demonstrate that behavioural audits focused on outputs are insufficient: fair outputs can mask exploitable internal biases. They also motivate dual-layer testing frameworks combining output evaluation with representational analysis for AI governance in high-stakes decisions.

Trajectory-based data attribution methods estimate the influence of training samples on model predictions by unrolling the training trajectory. They are widely used in applications such as data selection, data valuation, and model diagnosis, but there is a lack of comprehensive error analysis of these methods, raising concerns about method faithfulness and hindering reliable deployment. In this work, we provide the first systematic analysis of error sources in trajectory-based data attribution, together with concrete remedies to mitigate them and practical guidelines for downstream use. We organize the total error into three categories, config-level, algorithm-level, and system-level. We make three contributions. First, we identify optimizer mismatch as the dominant config-level error: existing methods derive their attribution under the assumption of SGD, even for models trained with the modern de facto optimizer AdamW. We propose AdamW-influence to fully account for AdamW's optimization dynamics, yielding improvements from 10% to over 300% in Spearman correlation between estimated and ground-truth influence across four settings spanning MLP, CNN, GPT-2, and Llama 3.2-1B. Second, we isolate the remaining algorithm-level error arising from the first-order Taylor approximation, identify the learning rate and trajectory length as factors governing the error magnitude, and derive a closed-form error proxy that can be evaluated along the original trajectory without retraining. Third, we translate these insights into practical guidelines for data selection by unifying offline and online strategies under a K-step look-ahead framework. Under this framework, online selection with a short horizon often matches or exceeds offline, and the optimal horizon can be tuned jointly with the learning rate. Together, these results turn the framework into an actionable selection recipe for practitioners.

$U$-statistics play a central role in statistical inference. In many modern applications, however, acquiring the labels required for $U$-statistics is costly. Motivated by recent advances in active inference, we develop an active inference framework for $U$-statistics that selectively queries informative labels to improve estimation efficiency under a fixed labeling budget, while preserving valid statistical inference. Our approach is built on the augmented inverse probability weighting $U$-statistic, which is designed to incorporate the sampling rule and machine learning predictions. We characterize the optimal sampling rule that minimizes its variance and design practical sampling strategies. We further extend the framework to $U$-statistic-based empirical risk minimization. Experiments on real datasets demonstrate substantial gains in estimation efficiency over baseline methods, while maintaining target coverage.

Learning transferable representations for electroencephalography (EEG) remains challenging because EEG signals are inherently multi-channel and non-stationary. Channels observed at the same time provide coupled measurements of neural activity, while the relevant temporal dynamics vary across contexts. This structure is poorly matched by architectures that apply uniform computation across time or route each channel patch independently. To this end, we propose TRACE, an autoregressive EEG pre-training framework that predicts future EEG patches from causal context while performing temporally adaptive and cross-channel coherent computation. At each temporal step, TRACE derives an expert routing decision from the causal cross-channel history and applies it jointly to all channels at that step. This preserves instantaneous cross-channel coherence while allowing different temporal regimes to activate different computation. Since routing is defined over the available channel set and causal temporal context, TRACE is compatible with heterogeneous pre-training across corpora with different channel counts, montages, sequence lengths, and recording domains. Across eight downstream EEG benchmarks, TRACE is evaluated in both settings: when downstream domains are seen only as unlabeled pre-training data and when downstream datasets are completely unseen during pre-training. It obtains the best results on several benchmarks while remaining competitive on motor imagery and clinical event classification tasks, with ablations supporting the importance of cross-channel temporal routing.

The trustworthiness of AI decision-making systems is increasingly important. A key feature of such systems is the ability to provide recommendations for how an individual may reverse a negative decision, a problem known as algorithmic recourse. Existing approaches treat recourse outcomes as counterfactuals of a fixed unit, ignoring that real-world recourse involves repeated decisions on the same individual under possibly different latent conditions. We develop a causal framework that models recourse as a process over pre- and post-intervention outcomes, allowing for partial stability and resampling of latent variables. We introduce post-recourse stability conditions that enable reasoning about recourse from observational data alone, and develop a copula-based algorithm for inferring the effects of recourse under these conditions. For settings where paired observations of the same individual before and after intervention are available (called recourse data), we develop methods for inferring copula parameters and performing goodness-of-fit testing. When the copula model is rejected, we provide a distribution-free algorithm for learning recourse effects directly from recourse data. We demonstrate the value of the proposed methods on real and semi-synthetic datasets.

Automated systems built on artificial intelligence (AI) are increasingly deployed across high-stakes domains, raising critical concerns about fairness and the perpetuation of demographic disparities that exist in the world. In this context, causal inference provides a principled framework for reasoning about fairness, as it links observed disparities to underlying mechanisms and aligns naturally with human intuition and legal notions of discrimination. Prior work on causal fairness primarily focuses on the standard machine learning setting, where a decision-maker constructs a single predictive mechanism $f_{\widehat Y}$ for an outcome variable $Y$, while inheriting the causal mechanisms of all other covariates from the real world. The generative AI setting, however, is markedly more complex: generative models can sample from arbitrary conditionals over any set of variables, implicitly constructing their own beliefs about all causal mechanisms rather than learning a single predictive function. This fundamental difference requires new developments in causal fairness methodology. We formalize the problem of causal fairness in generative AI and unify it with the standard ML setting under a common theoretical framework. We then derive new causal decomposition results that enable granular quantification of fairness impacts along both (a) different causal pathways and (b) the replacement of real-world mechanisms by the generative model's mechanisms. We establish identification conditions and introduce efficient estimators for causal quantities of interest, and demonstrate the value of our methodology by analyzing race and gender bias in large language models across different datasets.

In the data-driven era, large-scale datasets are routinely collected and analyzed using machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) to inform decisions in high-stakes domains such as healthcare, employment, and criminal justice, raising concerns about the fairness behavior of these systems. Existing works in fair ML cover tasks such as bias detection, fair prediction, and fair decision-making, but largely focus on static settings. At the same time, fairness in temporal contexts, particularly survival/time-to-event (TTE) analysis, remains relatively underexplored, with current approaches to fair survival analysis adopting statistical fairness definitions, which, even with unlimited data, cannot disentangle the causal mechanisms that generate disparities. To address this gap, we develop a causal framework for fairness in TTE analysis, enabling the decomposition of disparities in survival into contributions from direct, indirect, and spurious pathways. This provides a human-understandable explanation of why disparities arise and how they evolve over time. Our non-parametric approach proceeds in four steps: (1) formalizing the necessary assumptions about censoring and lack of confounding using a graphical model; (2) recovering the conditional survival function given covariates; (3) applying the Causal Reduction Theorem to reframe the problem in a form amenable to causal pathway decomposition; (4) estimating the effects efficiently. Finally, our approach is used to analyze the temporal evolution of racial disparities in outcome after admission to an intensive care unit (ICU).

Adaptive experimentation under unknown network interference requires solving two coupled problems: (i) learning the underlying dynamics of interference among units and (ii) using these dynamics to inform treatment allocation in order to maximize a cumulative outcome of interest (e.g. revenue). Existing adaptive experimentation methods either assume the interference network is fully known or bypass the network by operating on coarse cluster-level randomizations. We develop a Thompson sampling algorithm that jointly learns the interference network and adaptively optimizes individual-level treatment allocations via a Gibbs sampler. The algorithm returns both an optimized treatment policy and an estimate of the interference network; the latter supports downstream causal analyses such as estimation of direct, indirect, and total treatment effects. For additive spillover models, we show that total reward is linear in the treatment vector with coefficients given by an $n$-dimensional latent score. We prove a Bayesian regret bound of order $\sqrt{nT \cdot B \log(en/B)}$ for exact posterior sampling; empirically, our Gibbs-based approximate sampler achieves regret consistent with this rate and remains sublinear when the additive spillovers assumption is violated. For general Neighborhood Interference, where this reduction is unavailable, we analyze an explore-then-commit variant with $O(n^2 \log T)$ graph-discovery cost. An information-theoretic $Ω(n \log T)$ lower bound complements both results. Empirically, our method achieves more than an order-of-magnitude reduction in regret in head-to-head comparisons. On two real-world networks, the algorithm achieves sublinear regret and yields downstream effect estimates with small RMSE relative to the truth.

Corruption studies, the standard tool for evaluating chain-of-thought (CoT) faithfulness, infer which steps are ``computationally important'' from accuracy loss when steps are corrupted. We show that when benchmark chains end with an explicit terminal answer line, as in GSM8K and MATH, these tests largely measure \emph{answer placement} rather than where intermediate computation is carried out. Using matched GSM8K examples, removing only the final answer statement while preserving all reasoning collapses suffix sensitivity by about $19\times$ for Qwen~2.5-3B ($N{=}300$, $p{=}0.022$). Conflicting-answer prompts, which contain correct reasoning but a wrong explicit final answer, drive accuracy to zero or near-zero at 7B across five open-weight model families; wrong-answer following is strong at 3B--7B and attenuates sharply at larger scales. Replications on MATH, within-stable comparisons at 7B, and suffix-free chains show the same pattern in different guises: corruption sensitivity tracks the location of explicit answer text, not a fixed computational depth in the reasoning. Generation-time probes indicate that final answers are rarely early-determined during generation (${<}5\%$ early commitment), yet consumption-time behavior systematically follows explicit answer text. The confound is therefore largely a readout effect when the chain is consumed. We propose a three-prerequisite protocol (question-only control, format characterization, and an all-position sweep) as a practical minimum for future corruption-based faithfulness studies.

Grey failures in the computing continuum produce ambiguous overlapping symptoms that existing approaches fail to diagnose reliably, either due to a lack of causal awareness or acting under high epistemic uncertainty, risking destructive interventions. This paper presents an uncertainty-aware resilience micro-agent for causal observability (AURORA), a lightweight framework for diagnosing and mitigating grey failures in edge-tier environments. The framework employs parallel micro-agents that integrate the free-energy principle, causal do-calculus, and localized causal state-graphs to support counterfactual root-cause analysis within each fault's Markov blanket. Restricting inference to causally relevant variables reduces computational overhead while preserving diagnostic fidelity. AURORA further introduces a dual-gated execution mechanism that authorizes remediation only when causal confidence is high and predicted epistemic uncertainty is bounded; otherwise, it abstains from local intervention and escalates the diagnostic payload to the fog tier. Our experiments demonstrate that AURORA outperforms baselines, achieving a 0% destructive action rate, while maintaining 62.0% repair accuracy and a 3ms mean time to repair.

Constraint-based causal discovery is widely used for learning causal structures, but heavy reliance on conditional independence (CI) testing makes it computationally expensive in high-dimensional settings. To mitigate this limitation, many divide-and-conquer frameworks have been proposed, but most assume causal sufficiency, i.e., no latent variables. In this paper, we show that divide-and-conquer strategies can be theoretically generalized beyond causal sufficiency to settings with latent variables. Specifically, we propose a recursive decomposition framework, termed DiCoLa, that enables divide-and-conquer causal discovery in the presence of latent variables. It recursively decomposes the global learning task into smaller subproblems and integrates their solutions through a principled reconstruction step to recover the global structure. We theoretically establish the soundness and completeness of the proposed framework. Extensive experiments on synthetic data demonstrate that our approach significantly improves computational efficiency across a range of causal discovery algorithms, while experiments on a real-world dataset further illustrate its practical effectiveness.

Causal sensitivity analysis aims to provide bounds for causal effect estimates in the presence of unobserved confounding. However, existing methods for causal sensitivity analysis are per-instance procedures, meaning that changes to the dataset, causal query, sensitivity level, or treatment require new computation. Here, we instead present an in-context learning approach. Specifically, we propose an amortized approach to causal sensitivity analysis based on prior-data fitted networks. A key challenge is that the sensitivity bounds are not directly available when sampling training data. To address this, we develop a general prior-data construction that is applicable across the class of generalized treatment sensitivity models. Our construction involves a Lagrangian scalarization of the objective to generate training labels for the bounds through a tradeoff between causal effect min/max-imization and sensitivity model violation, which avoids model-specific analytical derivations. We further show that, under standard convexity and linearity conditions, our objective recovers the full Pareto frontier of solutions. Empirically, we demonstrate our amortized approach across various datasets, causal queries, and sensitivity levels, where our approach achieves a test-time computation that is orders of magnitude faster than per-instance methods. To the best of our knowledge, ours is the first foundation model for in-context learning for causal sensitivity analysis.

Learning a physical model from video data that can comprehend physical laws and predict the future trajectories of objects is a formidable challenge in artificial intelligence. Prior approaches either leverage various Partial Differential Equations (PDEs) as soft constraints in the form of PINN losses, or integrate physics simulators into neural networks; however, they often rely on strong priors or high-quality geometry reconstruction. In this paper, we propose CausalGS, a framework that learns the causal dynamics of complex dynamic 3D scenes solely from multi-view videos, while dispensing with the reliance on explicit priors. At its core is an inverse physics inference module that decouples the complex dynamics problem from the video into the joint inference of two factors: the initial velocity field representing the scene's kinematics, and the intrinsic material properties governing its dynamics. This inferred physical information is then utilized within a differentiable physics simulator to guide the learning process in a physics-regularized manner. Extensive experiments demonstrate that CausalGS surpasses the state-of-the-art on the highly challenging task of long-term future frame extrapolation, while also exhibiting advanced performance in novel view interpolation. Crucially, our work shows that, without any human annotation, the model is able to learn the complex interactions between multiple physical properties and understand the causal relationships driving the scene's dynamic evolution, solely from visual observations.

In causal inference, confounders are variables that influence both treatment decisions and outcomes. However, unlike as in randomized clinical trials, the treatment assignment mechanism in observational studies is not known, and it is thus unclear which covariates act as confounders. Here, we aim to generate insight for causal inference and answer: which of the observed covariates act as confounders? We introduce ConfoundingSHAP, a Shapley-based method for attributing confounding strength to individual covariates. Our contributions are twofold. First, we propose a Shapley game targeted to infer the confounding strength of the covariates. Our resulting Shapley values differ from the standard applications of SHAP explanations on causal targets, such as understanding treatment effect heterogeneity, which are ill-suited for our task. Second, as our task requires evaluating the value function over many adjustment sets, we provide a scalable TabPFN-based estimation that avoids exhaustive refitting. We demonstrate the practical value across various datasets, where ConfoundingSHAP provides informative explanations of which observed covariates drive confounding and thereby helps to provide more insight for causal inference in practice.

Estimating heterogeneous treatment effects with machine learning has attracted substantial attention in both academic research and industrial practice. However, the two communities often evaluate models under markedly different conditions. Methodological work typically relies on semi-simulated benchmarks and metrics that require counterfactual outcomes, whereas real-world applications rely on observable metrics based on ranking or test outcomes. Despite the well-known gap between methodological progress and practical deployment, the relationship between these evaluation regimes has not been examined systematically. We conduct a large-scale empirical study of treatment effect evaluation across standard semi-simulated benchmark families and real-world datasets. Our benchmark covers meta-learners paired with multiple base learners, as well as specialized causal machine learning models. We evaluate these methods using observable metrics common in application-oriented literature, alongside counterfactual metrics commonly used in methods papers. Our results reveal two complementary gaps. First, counterfactual metrics do not reliably recover the estimators preferred by observable metrics, even on the same semi-simulated benchmarks. Second, rankings obtained on semi-simulated benchmarks do not transfer to real datasets. We further find that simple meta-learners with strong base models are consistently competitive, in contrast to specialized causal models. Overall, our findings suggest that progress in treatment effect estimation research should not be assessed solely through counterfactual metrics and semi-simulated benchmarks, but it would benefit from incorporating observable metrics and real-data validation.

Neural networks have proved an effective means of learning control policies for autonomous systems, but these learned policies are difficult to understand due to the black-box nature of neural networks. This lack of interpretability makes safety assurance for such autonomous systems challenging. The fields of eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) and eXplainable Reinforcement Learning (XRL) aim to interpret the decision making processes of neural networks and autonomous agents, respectively. In particular, work on causal explanations aims to provide "why" and "why not" explanations for why a model made a given decision. However, most of the work on explainability to date utilises a distilled version of the original model. While this distilled policy is interpretable, it necessarily degrades in performance significantly when compared to the original model, and is not guaranteed to be an accurate reflection of the decision making processes in the original model and as such cannot be used to guarantee its safety. Recent work on understanding the geometry of ReLU neural networks shows that a ReLU network corresponds to a piecewise linear function divided into regions defined by an n-dimensional convex polytope. Through this lens, a neural network can be understood as dividing the input space into distinct regions which apply a single linear function for each output neuron. We show that this geometric representation can be used to generate causal explanations for the network's behaviour similar to previous work, but which extracts rules directly from the geometry of Neural Networks with the ReLU activation function, and is therefore an accurate reflection of the network's behaviour.

Distributional causal inference requires estimating not only average treatment effects but also interventional outcome distributions, including quantiles, tail risks, and policy-dependent uncertainty. As a method for distributional causal inference, generative adversarial network (GAN)-based counterfactual methods are flexible tools for this task. However, these methods have several limitations. First, the objectives of certain techniques do not coincide with the statistical risk of the identifiable causal target, and therefore provide limited theoretical guarantees regarding estimable counterfactual distributions or optimality. Second, they tend to rely on unstable density-based methods, such as density ratio estimation. In this paper, we propose GANICE (GAN for Interventional Conditional Estimation) with several advantages: it (i) clarifies the conditional interventional distribution for each treatment--covariate state as the causal estimation target; (ii) estimates the conditional distribution such that its averaged Wasserstein risk is minimized; (iii) establishes minimax optimality. GANICE achieves these advantages through the introduction of the extended Wasserstein distance, the incorporation of a cellwise critic in its dual, and an optimality proof based on Besov space theory. Our experiments demonstrate that GANICE consistently outperforms existing methods.

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.

We propose SVAR-FM (Structural VAR with Flow Matching), a framework for time series causal discovery that treats a physics-based simulator as a mechanical realization of Pearl's do operator. Clamping a variable inside the simulator physically severs confounding paths, producing interventional data by construction. Conditional Flow Matching then learns the nonlinear interventional conditionals. Theoretically, we prove that the full structural VAR becomes identifiable under a coverage condition on the simulator-clampable variables, and derive an end-to-end error bound that decomposes into Monte Carlo, simulator fidelity, and Flow Matching terms. A sign-flip corollary predicts that when simulator accuracy falls below a threshold, the estimated causal effect reverses sign. Empirically, a benchmark across four scientific domains confirms that SVAR-FM recovers the correct causal sign where observational methods produce sign-reversed estimates due to confounding. A case study in ultrafast laser physics verifies the sign-flip prediction by physically varying the accuracy level of a first-principles quantum solver: the low-accuracy setting reverses the causal sign, while the high-accuracy setting recovers the correct direction (R-squared = 0.983, zero bias).

Autonomous language agents increasingly expose traces, memories, plans and constraints, but existing evaluations rarely test whether these state variables are bound to final actions. We introduce causal state binding, an intervention-coupled evaluation framework that measures whether actions change with the event-specific decisive state while remaining invariant to irrelevant cues. The primary readout is a hidden-target finite-action benchmark in which scorer-side intervention targets are assigned before generation and withheld from the model-visible prompt. Across 57,816 scored records in seven corpus-level units, structured-agent conditions exceeded high-randomness controls and targeted component removals on reason, memory, veto and self-continuity responsiveness. Open-weight validation across Qwen2.5 7B, 14B and 32B plus Mistral-7B showed that action priors, no-field prompts and scrambled decisive context did not recover the structured-control signature. In diagnostic finite-action probes, the minimal decisive-field readout recovered the prescribed action pattern whereas surface-only, action-prior-only and scrambled-field controls did not. Across 300 SWE-bench Lite issue records and six API models, adding an oracle-free causal state-binding composite to a full non-CSB baseline increased constraint-clean issue-to-file hit@3 AUC from 0.873 to 0.935. This validation concerns issue-to-file localization, not patch application or SWE-bench issue resolution. These results support a measurement principle for agent evaluation: action control is predicted by event-specific state-action binding, not by output entropy, action-prior matching or rationale format alone.

Machine learning classifiers in dynamic environments face concept drift -- changes in the data-generating process that degrade performance. Conventional evaluation via static test sets or noise perturbations fails to preserve causal dependencies in tabular data, often producing causally invalid assessments. Post-hoc tools like SHAP and LIME offer correlational insights that may not reflect the causal mechanisms driving model failure. We propose a framework that complements existing drift detection by leveraging Structural Causal Models as "Digital Twins" of data-generating processes, enabling precise causal interventions while preserving structural dependencies. Our technique, Causal Parametric Drift Simulation, stress-tests classifiers to identify vulnerabilities before deployment. Experiments on the Open Sourcing Mental Illness (OSMH) dataset demonstrate that this approach exposes latent vulnerabilities invisible to standard statistical monitors.

We present Version 2 of system Cplus2ASP, which implements the definite fragment of action language C+. Its input language is fully compatible with the language of the Causal Calculator Version 2, but the new system is significantly faster thanks to modern answer set solving techniques. The translation implemented in the system is a composition of several recent theoretical results. The system orchestrates a tool chain, consisting of f2lp, clingo, iclingo, and as2transition. Under the incremental execution mode, the system translates a C+ description into the input language of iclingo, exploiting its incremental grounding mechanism. The correctness of this execution is justified by the module theorem extended to programs with nested expressions. In addition, the input language of the system has many useful features, such as external atoms by means of Lua calls and the user interactive mode. The system supports extensible multi-modal translations for other action languages, such as B and BC, as well.

Unobserved confounding prevents standard covariate adjustment from identifying causal response functions in observational studies. Proxy causal learning addresses this problem through bridge equations involving treatment- and outcome-inducing proxies, avoiding direct recovery of the latent confounder. Existing doubly robust proxy estimators combine outcome and treatment bridges, but typically rely on fixed kernels, sieves, or low-dimensional semiparametric models; existing neural proxy methods are more flexible, but are largely single-bridge estimators. We develop a neural doubly robust framework for proxy causal learning with continuous and structured treatments. Our method introduces a neural mean-embedding estimator for the treatment bridge, combines it with a neural outcome bridge, and estimates the doubly robust correction through a final regression stage. The framework covers population, heterogeneous, and conditional dose-response functions, yielding full response-curve estimators rather than binary-treatment effects. The algorithms use two stages for each bridge and history-aware updates of the final linear layers to stabilize stochastic multi-stage training. We prove consistency of the algorithms showing that the doubly robust error is controlled by the final averaging and regression errors together with the smaller of the outcome- and treatment-side weak-norm bridge errors. Across synthetic and image-valued benchmarks, the proposed estimators outperform existing baselines and single-bridge neural estimators, showing the benefit of combining learned outcome and treatment bridges in a doubly robust construction. Our implementation is available at https://github.com/BariscanBozkurt/DRPCL-Neural-Mean-Embedding.

Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting assumes that generated reasoning reflects a model's internal computation. We show this assumption is wrong in a specific, measurable way: models internally detect their own reasoning errors but outwardly express confidence in them. A linear probe on hidden states predicts trace correctness with 0.95 AUROC -- from the very first reasoning step (0.79) -- while verbalized confidence for wrong traces is 4.55/5, nearly identical to correct ones (4.87/5). A text-surface classifier achieves only 0.59 on the same data, confirming a 0.20-point gap invisible in the generated text. This hidden error awareness holds across three model families (Qwen, Llama, Phi), 1.5B-72B parameters, and RL-trained reasoning models (DeepSeek-R1, 0.852 AUROC). The natural question is whether this signal can fix the errors it detects. It cannot. Four interventions -- activation steering, probe-guided best-of-N, self-correction, and activation patching -- all fail; patching destroys output coherence entirely. The signal is diagnostic, not causal: a readout of computation quality, not a lever to redirect it. This delineates a boundary for mechanistic interpretability: error representations during reasoning are fundamentally different from the factual knowledge representations that prior work has successfully edited.

Long-horizon, sparse-reward tasks pose a fundamental challenge for reinforcement learning, since single-step TD learning suffers from bootstrapping error accumulation across successive Bellman updates. Actor-critic methods with action chunking address this by operating over temporally extended actions, which reduce the effective horizon, enable fast value backups, and support temporally consistent exploration. However, existing methods rely on a fixed chunk size and therefore cannot adaptively balance reactivity against temporal consistency. A large fixed chunk size reduces responsiveness to new observations, while a small one produces incoherent motions, forcing task-specific tuning of the chunk size. To address this limitation, we propose Adaptive Chunk Size Actor-Critic (ACSAC). ACSAC leverages a causal Transformer critic to evaluate expected returns for action chunks of different sizes. At each chunk boundary, it adaptively selects the chunk size that maximizes the expected return, supporting flexible, state-dependent chunk sizes without task-specific tuning. We prove that the ACSAC Bellman operator is a contraction whose unique fixed point is the action-value function of the adaptive policy. Experiments on OGBench demonstrate that ACSAC achieves state-of-the-art performance on long-horizon, sparse-reward manipulation tasks across both offline RL and offline-to-online RL settings.

The transition to First-Price Auctions (FPA) in digital advertising has spurred significant research, yet existing work typically assumes access to a valuation oracle, ignoring the reality that values must be inferred from censored data. While Linear Treatment Effect (LTE) models address this by learning value uplift, they have not been adapted to realistic settings with hard Budget constraints or Return-on-Spend (RoS) targets requiring regret and violation control. In this work, we propose a unified primal-dual framework for constrained FPAs that jointly learns the latent LTE valuation parameters and the competitor's bid distribution. This simultaneous learning introduces a critical technical challenge: the estimation error is dynamically scaled by the Lagrangian multiplier, potentially leading to unbounded regret. We resolve this by leveraging a strong Slater condition and a novel adaptive burn-in procedure to stabilize the dual variables. Our approach achieves near-optimal regret guarantees, providing the first theoretically grounded solution for constrained bidding with latent valuations.

Although Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) have achieved strong performance on general video understanding, their susceptibility to textual prior shortcuts during causal discovery has been recognized as a critical deficit. The underlying mechanisms of this phenomenon remain incompletely understood, as existing benchmarks only measure response accuracy without revealing the sources and extent of the deficit. We introduce ProCauEval, a perturbation-based evaluation protocol that shifts from outcome assessment to mechanism diagnosis, probing causal discovery through five controlled configurations that systematically manipulate visual and textual modalities to decompose their respective contributions to model behavior and dissect the failure modes. Evaluating 17 mainstream LMMs, we find that models faithfully perceive video content yet systematically underexploit it during causal reasoning. We further observe that stronger post-training amplifies rather than mitigates textual prior reliance, and that higher baseline performance correlates with greater fragility under perturbation. To address these, we propose Anti-Distillation Policy Optimization (ADPO), a reinforcement learning framework built on negative teacher alignment, which augments GRPO by explicitly pushing the policy away from a prior-only counterfactual teacher induced by visual corruption. Specifically, ADPO maximizes the divergence between the policy distributions conditioned on the original and visually corrupted inputs, thereby forcing the model to ground its reasoning in visual evidence rather than textual shortcuts. Extensive experiments show that ADPO improves visual engagement without sacrificing fundamental comprehension, thus offering a preliminary step toward reliable causal discovery.

Query-separated computation forces a representation to play an operational role: data are encoded before a query is known, and a later decoder can answer only through the intermediate interface. In this regime the representation functions as a message rather than merely as a feature map. We formalize this observation by embedding information causality (IC) into representation learning, obtaining a framework called neural information causality (Neural-IC). The revised formulation separates two logically distinct statements. First, every query-separated architecture induces a random-access communication experiment and obeys the embedding inequality $I_{\mathrm{N\text{-}RAC}}\le I(\vec a:H,B)$. Second, any independently certified physical capacity bound on the interface, such as a hard $m$-bit alphabet, a finite-precision register, or a power-constrained noisy channel, implies $I_{\mathrm{N\text{-}RAC}}\le C_H$. This separation avoids treating capacity as a post hoc definition and makes Neural-IC an operational diagnostic for query leakage, precision leakage, and episode-specific memory. We also provide an exact one-bit classical RAC benchmark, showing explicitly that the relevant quantum enhancement is not total information beyond the bottleneck, but fair query-conditioned access. For CHSH-type correlation layers, nested Neural-RAC protocols multiply correlation biases across depth; requiring stability of a one-bit bottleneck for arbitrary depth selects the Tsirelson threshold. We extend the analysis to asymmetric seed biases, to multi-capacity finite-depth phase diagrams, and to correlated data via a conditional information score. Controlled simulations, including straight-through binary bottlenecks and deliberately leaky ablations, verify that apparent violations are accounted for by broken query separation or undercounted capacity.

A valid tool call is not necessarily a valid intervention. Tool-using language agents are guarded by schema validators, policy filters, provenance checks, state predictors, and self-verification, yet such safeguards do not certify that a state-changing action has an identifiable causal effect. In confounded workflows, the action that looks optimal in observational logs can reduce utility when executed. We introduce CIVeX, a causal intervention verifier that maps proposed actions to structural causal queries over a committed action-state graph, checks identifiability, and returns one of four auditable verdicts: EXECUTE, REJECT, EXPERIMENT, or ABSTAIN. Execution requires an assumption-scoped causal certificate carrying graph commitments, an identification argument, a one-sided lower confidence bound (LCB), provenance, and risk limits. On Causal-ToolBench (1,890 instances, 7 seeds), CIVeX yields zero observed false executions across moderate and adversarial confounding. Under adversarial confounding it reaches 84.9% accuracy and 81.1% of oracle utility (+2.23 vs +2.76) and is the only non-oracle method whose constrained utility under a zero-false-execution constraint exceeds the AlwaysAbstain floor. On IHDP and ZOZO Open Bandit (real production logs with uniform-random ground truth), CIVeX matches Oracle correct-execution within 0.1pp and cuts per-execute false-execution by >=50x over naive baselines. A chain-of-thought LLM verifier (Claude Opus, Sonnet) cuts false-execution by an order of magnitude over a terse baseline, yet under adversarial confounding Opus's utility falls to 74% of CIVeX's. Intervention identifiability, not action validity, is the missing primitive for reliable tool use.

Despite surpassing human performance across mathematics, coding, and other knowledge-intensive tasks, large language models (LLMs) continue to struggle with causal reasoning. A core obstacle is the target data itself: causal systems are complex and often expressed in non-executable forms, while ground-truth answers to causal queries are inherently scarce. We introduce CauSim, a framework that turns causal reasoning from a scarce-label problem into a scalable supervised one. CauSim constructs increasingly complex causal simulators: executable structural causal models (SCMs), incrementally built by LLMs, that scale to globally complex systems while maintaining verifiable answers to causal queries. CauSim operates across representations by formalizing non-executable causal knowledge into code, enabling data augmentation, and translating executable SCMs into natural language, enabling supervision in previously difficult-to-supervise representations. We structure our research into two parts: (1) how to construct increasingly complex causal simulators, and (2) a systematic study of what CauSim enables, demonstrating generalization across representations, consistent gains from curriculum scaling and data volume, LLM self-improvement through self-generated simulators, and data augmentation via formalization of existing domain knowledge.

Sparse autoencoders (SAEs) decompose transformer residual streams into interpretable feature dictionaries, yet the relationship between SAE width and causal influence on model output has not been systematically characterised. We introduce causal dimensionality kappa(L, M, T), defined as the effective rank of the expected Jacobian outer product at layer L, and show it can be estimated via the SAE width sweep paired with attribution patching. Across seven SAE widths from 16,384 to 1,048,576 features on Gemma-2-2B layer 12, representational capacity grows 15.6x while causal capacity grows only 4.35x: a robust separation we term the representational-causal wedge. A saturating fit yields kappa-hat approximately 1,990 with kappa-hat / d_model = 0.86 and participation-ratio lower bound kappa_PR approximately 280. Crucially, kappa is invariant to model scaling: Gemma-2-9B and Gemma-2-2B yield identical N_causal = 328 at the same SAE width despite a 3.46x parameter increase (the count is forced to 2% of SAE width by calibration; the substantive empirical claim is shape invariance of the AtP score distribution under matched seq=512 conditions). Across eight network depths kappa is constant while the absolute attribution threshold drops 20x from layer 1 to layer 23. Five controls (architecture invariance, threshold robustness, geometric privilege, synthetic ground-truth recovery, and a four-cell encoder/decoder ablation) pin down what kappa measures and what it does not. Our findings establish kappa as a measurable, model-intrinsic property of transformer layers: sub-linearly recoverable by SAE width, invariant to model scaling, and structured across network depth.

We establish, from the point of view of Explainable AI (XAI), connections between Consistency-Based Diagnosis (CBD), on one side, and Actual Causality and Causal Responsibility, on the other. CBD has received little attention from the XAI community. Connections between these two areas could have a fruitful impact on XAI and Explainable Data Management.

LLMs are increasingly used to explain personal sensing data, translating traces of activity and mood into natural-language accounts of why an anomalous day may have occurred. However, such explanations can sound coherent and personally meaningful even when the underlying evidence is sparse or missing. We introduce epistemic overreach (EO) as a measure for cases where a generated explanation implies more than the available sensing evidence can justify. To audit how often and in what forms EO occurs, we obtained anomalous-day scenarios from three longitudinal sensing datasets of college students: StudentLife, GLOBEM, and CollegeExperience. Across activity, sleep, and affect anomalies, we generated 14,922 explanations using three LLM families -- Llama, Qwen, and GPT -- under two prompting conditions: one minimally constrained prompt and another prompt explicitly instructing models to bound claims to the data. For each scenario, we varied the amount of behavioral evidence available to the model to examine whether more evidence reduces EO. We evaluated each explanation using a structured rubric, decomposing EO into the dimensions of unsupported causal attribution, unacknowledged data gaps, overconfident language, temporal inconsistency, and diagnostic inference. We find that LLMs routinely attribute anomalous days to causes without sufficient support from the data, and that this pattern replicates across datasets, anomaly types, and model families. Further, providing richer context does not reliably reduce EO; bounded prompting helps but does not eliminate it. These findings suggest that evidential grounding should be a first-order evaluation criterion for LLM-generated personal sensing explanations, alongside fluency and plausibility. We argue that personal sensing explanations require evidential discipline: systems must distinguish what is observed, what is inferred, and what remains unknown.

We introduce the Sinkhorn treatment effect, an entropic optimal transport measure of divergence between counterfactual distributions. Unlike classical quantities such as the average treatment effect, this measure captures differences across entire distributions. We analyze this divergence as a statistical functional and show it can be written as a smooth transformation of counterfactual mean embeddings with an appropriate kernel. This characterization allows us to establish first-order pathwise differentiability in general, and second-order pathwise differentiability under the null hypothesis of equal counterfactual distributions. Leveraging this smoothness, we construct debiased estimators and use them to obtain asymptotically valid tests for distributional treatment effects with a fixed entropic regularization parameter. Because the power of the test depends on this unknown parameter, we further propose an aggregated test that combines evidence across a grid of regularization choices. Experiments on simulated and image data demonstrate the practical advantages of our estimator and testing procedure.

Distributional treatment effects can be invisible to means: a treatment may preserve average outcomes while changing tails, modes, dispersion, or rare-event probabilities. Kernel tests can detect discrepancies between interventional outcome laws, but global tests do not reveal where the laws differ. We propose DR-ME, to our knowledge the first semiparametrically efficient finite-location test for interpretable distributional treatment effects. DR-ME evaluates an interventional kernel witness at learned outcome locations, returning causal-discrepancy coordinates rather than only a global rejection. From observational data, we derive orthogonal doubly robust kernel features whose centered oracle form is the canonical gradient of this finite witness. For fixed locations, we characterize the local testing limit: DR-ME is chi-square calibrated under the null, has noncentral chi-square local power, and uses the covariance whitening that optimizes local signal-to-noise for discrepancies visible through the selected coordinates. This efficient local-power geometry yields a principled location-learning criterion, with sample splitting preserving post-selection validity. Experiments show near-nominal type-I error, competitive power against global doubly robust kernel tests, and interpretable learned locations that localize distributional effects in a semi-synthetic medical-imaging study.

Mechanistic interpretability papers increasingly use causal vocabulary: circuits, mediators, causal abstraction, monosemanticity. Such claims require explicit identification assumptions. A purposive audit of 10 papers across four methodological strands finds no dedicated identification-assumptions section and a recurring pattern: validation metrics such as faithfulness, completeness, monosemanticity, alignment, or ablation effects are reported as causal support without stating the assumptions that make them identifying. A two-human-coder audit on $n=30$ reproduces the direction of the main finding: dedicated identification sections are absent, and validation-metric substitution is common, though exact Dim B/D counts are coding-rule sensitive. The paper proposes a disclosure norm: state whether the claim is causal, name the identification strategy, enumerate assumptions, stress at least one, and explain how conclusions shift if assumptions fail. Validation is not identification.

Causal inference, especially in observational studies, relies on untestable assumptions about the true data-generating process. Sensitivity analysis helps us determine how robust our conclusions are when we alter these underlying assumptions. Existing frameworks for sensitivity analysis are concerned with worst-case changes in assumptions. In this work, we argue that using such pessimistic criteria can often become uninformative or lead to conclusions contradicting our prior knowledge about the world. To demonstrate this claim, we generalize the recent s-value framework (Gupta & Rothenhäusler, 2023) to estimate the sensitivity of three different common assumptions in causal inference. Empirically, we find that, indeed, worst-case conclusions about sensitivity can rely on unrealistic changes in the data-generating process. To overcome this, we extend the s-value framework with a new sensitivity analysis criterion: Bayesian Sensitivity Value (BSV), which computes the expected sensitivity of an estimate to assumption violations under priors constructed from real-world evidence. We use Monte Carlo approximations to estimate this quantity and illustrate its applicability in an observational study on the effect of diabetes treatments on weight loss.

We study planning site formation in language models -- where internal representations of structurally-constrained future tokens form during the forward pass, and whether they causally drive generation. Using rhyming-couplet completion as a clean test of forward-looking constraint, we apply two lightweight methods (linear probing and activation patching) across Qwen3, Gemma-3, and Llama-3 at more than ten scales. Probing shows that future-rhyme information is linearly decodable at the line boundary, with signal that strengthens with scale in all three families. Activation patching reveals that only Gemma-3-27B causally relies on this encoding, exhibiting a handoff in which the causal driver migrates from the rhyme word to the line boundary around layer 30. Every other model we test conditions on the rhyme word throughout generation, with near-zero causal effect at the line boundary despite strong probe signal. We localize the Gemma-3-27B handoff to five attention heads through two-stage path patching that recover ~90% of the rhyme-routing capacity at the newline.

Estimating counterfactual distributions under interventions is central to treatment risk assessment and counterfactual generation tasks. Existing approaches model the counterfactual distribution as a standalone generative target, without exploiting its relationship to the observational data. In this work, we show that under standard assumptions, observational and counterfactual outcome distributions are tightly linked: they have identical support and tail behavior, remain statistically close under weak confounding, and share any features of high-dimensional outcomes which are invariant to confounders. These properties motivate learning counterfactual distributions not from scratch, but via a deconfounding flow from the observational distribution. We formulate this problem via flow-matching and derive a semiparametrically efficient estimator based on a novel efficient influence function correction. We subsequently extend our estimator to target minimal-energy flows in high-dimensions, which we show can be especially simple targets between observational and counterfactual distributions. In experiments, deconfounding flows outperform existing debiased counterfactual distribution estimators, while also mitigating known failure modes of flow-based methods.

Learning parity functions, more general modular addition, is a challenging machine learning task due to its input sensitivity. A recent study substantially scaled modular addition learning in both the number of summands and the modulus. Its key idea is to increase zeros in training sequences, reducing the effective number of summands and thus controlling training difficulty; however, this induces covariate shift between training and test input distributions. This study theoretically and empirically analyzes this side effect and proposes a covariate-shift-free method for modular addition. Specifically, we introduce an auxiliary modulus $Kq$ during training, which reduces wrap-around frequency and problem difficulty while preserving the same input distribution across training and testing. Experiments show strong scalability and sample efficiency: even for large input length $N$, large modulus $q$, and small datasets -- where the sparse method fails to learn -- our method achieves equal or better match accuracy and relaxed $τ$-accuracy. For example, at $N=64$ and $q=974269$, our method trained on 100K samples achieves $97.0\%$ $τ$-accuracy at $τ=0.05$, while the sparse method achieves only $9.5\%$ with the same data size and $93.9\%$ even when extended to 1M samples.

Causal probing methods aim to test and control how internal representations influence the behavior of generative models. In causal probing, an intervention modifies hidden states so that a property takes on a different value. Most existing approaches define such interventions by training an auxiliary probe classifier, which ties the method to a specific task or model and risks misalignment with the model's predictive geometry. We propose Hidden-state Driven Margin Intervention (HDMI), a probe-free, gradient-based technique that directly steers hidden states using the model's native output. HDMI applies a margin objective that increases the probability of a target continuation while decreasing that of the source, without relying on probe classifiers. We further introduce a lookahead variant (LA-HDMI) for text editing that backpropagates through the softmax embeddings, modifying the current hidden state so that the likelihood of user-specified tokens increases in next token generations while preserving fluency. To evaluate interventions, we measure completeness (whether the targeted property changes as intended) and selectivity (whether unrelated properties are preserved), and report their harmonic mean as an overall measure of reliability. HDMI consistently achieves higher reliability than prior methods on the LGD agreement corpus and the CausalGym benchmark, across Meta-Llama-3-8B-Instruct, and Pythia-70M.