The paper tackles the problem of estimating causal effects when an unobserved confounder is present. It assumes a single, possibly multi‑dimensional proxy variable for the confounder and knowledge of the mechanism that generates this proxy. Under the Single Proxy Identifiability of Causal Effects (SPICE) assumption, the authors prove that the error mechanism is complete and causal effects are identifiable, extending prior proxy‑based results to continuous, multi‑dimensional settings and more flexible functional forms. They also introduce SPICE‑Net, a neural‑network‑based framework for estimating causal effects applicable to both discrete and continuous treatments.
By Silvan Vollmer, Niklas Pfister, Sebastian Weichwald
arXiv:2609.22383v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Instrumental variable (IV) methods address treatment endogeneity, but with non-compliance and heterogeneous treatment effects a binary instrument gen...
By Zixuan Yao, Guosheng Yin
arXiv:2503. 20546v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We consider the problem of estimating the expected causal effect $E[Y|do(X)]$ for a target variable $Y$ when treatment $X$ is set by intervention, focusing on continuous random variables.
By Marlies Hafer, Alexander Marx
The paper introduces causal foundation models that can bound the effects of interventions and counterfactuals using only observational data. It defines a canonical prior with full support over structural causal models with discrete observables, enabling the translation of counterfactual bounding into learning distributions over functions that map data and structural assumptions to causal queries. This approach extends causal foundational modelling to partially-identifiable causal effects, where unobserved confounding leads to multiple compatible values for the effect.
By Alexis Bellot, Anish Dhir
arXiv:2601.00287v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: The Stable Unit Treatment Value Assumption (SUTVA) includes the condition that there are no multiple versions of treatment in causal inferenc...
By Kohei Yoshikawa, Shuichi Kawano
arXiv:2609.17238v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: High-dimensional data create challenges for causal effect estimation because identifying the covariates needed for correct model specification become...
By Muwon Kwon, Peter M. Steiner
arXiv:2606. 19361v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Identification conditions describe the computability of a target query or parameter of interest as a function of the type and amount of information available.
By Lucius E. J. Bynum, Rajesh Ranganath, Kyunghyun Cho
arXiv:2609.40051v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Estimating causal effects from observational data is central to science and policy, but the effects are not identified when confounders are unmeasured....
By Yonghan Jung
arXiv:2607. 14940v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We study causal inference under outcome interference for sequential, observational settings.
By Phevos Paschalidis, Constantinos Daskalakis, Devavrat Shah
arXiv:2606. 03332v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Probabilistic models are typically trained using task-agnostic objectives like log-loss, which can lead to significant errors in downstream estimation.
By Roman Plaud, Alexandre Perez-Lebel, Antoine Saillenfest, Thomas Bonald, Marine Le Morvan, Ga\"el Varoquaux, Matthieu Labeau
arXiv:2609.06294v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Estimating conditional average treatment effects (CATE) enables efficient targeting of interventions, but many applications have limited experimental s...
By Maitreyi Swaroop, Shikha Bhat, Samantha Rodriguez, Tamar Krishnamurti, Bryan Wilder
The paper introduces a causal mediation framework to separate direct discrimination from structural inequality in AI-driven credit decisions. Using Pearl’s natural direct and indirect effects, it presents an identification strategy under treatment‑induced confounding and proposes a doubly‑robust estimator with efficiency guarantees. Empirical analysis of 89,465 mortgage applications shows that about 77% of racial denial disparities stem from financial mediators, while the remaining 23% represents a conservative lower bound on direct discrimination.
By Duraimurugan Rajamanickam