Causal Bandits

Measurement exploration reveals how interacting local controllers behave but can alter the steady-state regime a network operator seeks to optimize. Exploratory rewards may therefore fail to identify a configuration's no-exploration value: under full exploration, identical logged distributions can conceal different target values. Identification requires accounting for both action-law mismatch and shifts in the steady-state context distribution. We introduce CAUSAL-UCB, which selects configurations using optimistic bounds on target causal values. Its interference-aware clipped doubly robust evaluator produces predecision certificates separating statistical variation from calibrated identification, transport, and temporal-dependence errors. For any finite horizon and predetermined schedule of measurement-exploration rates $\{η_t\}$, we prove lower bounds of $Ω((1+\sum_tη_t)^{-1/2})$ on minimax inference error and $Ω(\sum_tη_t)$ on measurement-induced deployment loss in a stationary, potentially slow-mixing family. We bound regret under valid certificates and selected-information growth, and establish an anytime finite-sample certificate with a shared radius for estimation, selection, and reporting in a restricted known-local-interference model. In a high-mismatch benchmark with 24 paired seeds and 200 rounds, CAUSAL-UCB attains target regret of $1.732$ versus $6.326$ for certified IPS-UCB, with deployment gaps of $30.607$ and $23.217$, respectively. Independent-audit coverage tests and trace-driven semi-synthetic studies further assess certificate coverage and deployment trade-offs.

We study causal logistic bandits with counterfactual fairness constraints. The causal structure is given through known factual and counterfactual feature maps that share an unknown logistic reward parameter, but the learner observes only factual rewards. Consequently, the directions determining counterfactual feasibility need not be identifiable from the available feedback. The closest prior analyses either omit a coverage condition or impose a comparatively strong one, and do not establish matching lower bounds. We first show that some coverage condition is necessary: without a coverage-type restriction, factually indistinguishable environments with different optimal fair actions force $Ω(T)$ expected joint loss. Under a weaker full-rank condition on the factual covariance pooled across actions, we identify a target-specific information scale $V_\star$ that measures the difficulty of estimating rewards and counterfactual effects from factual feedback. We construct worst-case families satisfying this condition on which every policy incurs expected joint loss $Ω\left(\left[V_\star\min\{\log K,d\}\right]^{1/3}T^{2/3}\right)$. We also give an explore--then--exploit procedure tuned using $V_\star$ and an adaptive algorithm that does not require its value. Both algorithms achieve $\max\{R_T,V_T\}=\widetilde{O}\left(\left[V_\star\min\{\log K,d\}\right]^{1/3}T^{2/3}+κd/σ_0^2\right)$, where $R_T$ is regret relative to the best fair action and $V_T$ denotes the cumulative stage-wise positive violations. Thus the upper and lower bounds match in their leading dependence on $T$, $V_\star$, and $\min\{\log K,d\}$, up to logarithmic factors.

Causal bandits exploit structural relationships among variables to share information across interventions and accelerate the identification of high-reward decisions. In many applications, however, some variables cannot be directly manipulated, even though they influence the reward and provide useful information about the underlying causal system. We study contextual causal bandits with non-manipulable variables, where context variables are observed before action selection and additional variables are observed after each intervention. Assuming a known causal graph without latent confounding, we adopt a Bayesian formulation in which the conditional probability tables of the observational distribution constitute the unknown parameter. This representation allows observations collected under one intervention to update reward estimates for other interventions through their shared causal mechanisms. We develop causal variants of Thompson Sampling and Information-Directed Sampling (IDS) for this setting. For Thompson Sampling, we establish an entropy-dependent sublinear Bayesian regret bound. For IDS, we derive an entropy-dependent regret bound that explicitly quantifies the additional error introduced by Monte Carlo approximation of the expected regret and information gain; when these quantities are available exactly, the bound recovers the standard sublinear IDS rate. The dependence of these guarantees on the action-set size is worst-case: our model contains the standard multi-armed bandit as a special case. We further provide high-probability confidence bounds for the Monte Carlo estimates. Experiments on synthetic causal bandit tasks show that the proposed methods outperform causal and non-causal baselines by effectively exploiting information shared across interventions.

This paper studies the problem of identifying the treatment that maximizes the expected natural direct potential outcome (NDPO), which captures the potential outcome of an intervention while excluding the pathway transmitted through a mediator that researchers may wish to remove from evaluation. We first establish population-level identification of the expected NDPO in a causal bandit setting using observable interventional distributions. We then develop a fixed-confidence best-arm identification (BAI) algorithm based on the Track-and-Stop (TaS) framework, employing a cutting-set method to solve the resulting semi-infinite optimization problem. The proposed algorithm achieves sample-efficient identification with a high-probability correctness guarantee. We prove that it satisfies $δ$-correctness and asymptotic optimality. Finally, we validate the approach through empirical evaluations on a large-scale real-world advertising dataset (IPinYou).

Critical sequential decisions are rarely single-timescale: a strategic decision causally shapes the context in which every subsequent tactical choice is made; standard bandit and reinforcement-learning theory does not capture this causal coupling between timescales. We formalise the problem class as Nested Contextual Causal Bandits (NCCBs), a hierarchical SCM where each level's action sets the next level's context distribution, and propose Nested Causal Thompson Sampling (NCTS), which draws one mechanism-factorised belief per episode and acts recursively under it. Our main theoretical result is a causal PAC-Bayesian excess-risk bound that certifies any candidate deployment policy from historic data alone, off-policy and anytime, answering the deployment question: can we trust this agent here, and at what risk? Experiments on a hierarchical SCM show that, against a matched RFF-GP joint regression on the same function class, the factorised SCM-mechanism posterior transfers significantly better zero-shot under exogenous distribution shifts, the recursive meta-to-inner commit significantly dominates the joint-commit alternative in distribution, and the certificate significantly contracts as offline data accumulates. Combining these results, we establish progressive certified handover, a safe-deployment method: each timescale flips from a legacy controller to NCTS when gains can be certified, independently of the others.

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.

Treatment allocation under budget constraints is a central challenge in digital advertising: advertisers must decide which users to show ads to while spending a limited budget wisely. The standard approach follows a two-stage offline pipeline - first collect historical data to estimate heterogeneous treatment effects (HTE), then solve a constrained optimization to allocate the budget. This works well with abundant data, but fails in cold-start settings such as new campaigns, new markets, or new customer segments where little historical data exists. We propose Budget-Constrained Causal Bandits (BCCB), an online framework that learns which users respond to ads while simultaneously spending the budget, making treatment decisions one user at a time. BCCB unifies three components into a single sequential process: learning individual-level ad effectiveness, exploring users whose response is uncertain, and pacing the budget over time. We evaluated on the Criteo Uplift dataset, a large-scale advertising dataset from a real randomized controlled trial. Our key finding is a data-efficiency crossover: offline methods require approximately 10,000 historical observations to produce reliable results, while BCCB operates effectively from the very first user. Furthermore, BCCB exhibits 3-5x lower performance variance between runs, making it more practical for real campaign planning. Among purely online methods, BCCB consistently outperforms standard Thompson Sampling, budgeted Thompson Sampling, and greedy HTE estimation across all budget levels tested.

Causal knowledge can be used to support decision-making problems. This has been recognized in the causal bandits literature, where a causal (multi-armed) bandit is characterized by a causal graphical model and a target variable. The arms are then interventions on the causal model, and rewards are samples of the target variable. Causal bandits were originally studied with a focus on hard interventions. We focus instead on cases where the arms are conditional interventions, which more accurately model many real-world decision-making problems by allowing the value of the intervened variable to be chosen based on the observed values of other variables. This paper presents a graphical characterization of the minimal set of nodes guaranteed to contain the optimal conditional intervention, which maximizes the expected reward. We then propose an efficient algorithm with a time complexity of $O(|V| + |E|)$ to identify this minimal set of nodes. We prove that the graphical characterization and the proposed algorithm are correct. Finally, we empirically demonstrate that our algorithm significantly prunes the search space and substantially accelerates convergence rates when integrated into standard multi-armed bandit algorithms.