arXiv:2606. 03602v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Causal discovery from observational data remains challenging due to the fundamental limitations of purely statistical methods, such as statistical distinguishability within equivalence classes and sensitivity to finite sample sizes.
arXiv:2606. 10607v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Causal discovery aims to uncover causal structures from observational data, which is crucial for real-world decision-making.
The study evaluates 12 instruction‑tuned open‑weight LLMs on six causal‑graph benchmarks, testing five prompting strategies and four confidence sources. Findings show that LLMs tend to over‑predict edges, misclassify indirect or reversed edges as direct, and exhibit high over‑confidence, while conventional confidence estimates are unreliable and agreement signals offer limited improvement. The results suggest LLMs should be used as externally validated soft causal priors rather than definitive causal‑structure evidence.
arXiv:2608. 02877v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Causal discovery recovers directed structure from observational data and is increasingly used in clinical settings to support mechanism reasoning and fairness audits of predictive models.
arXiv:2609.36689v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models have achieved significant progress in event forecasting, yet their probability outputs exhibit systematic calibration bias that v...
arXiv:2404.06349v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The ability to understand causality significantly impacts the competence of large language models (LLMs) in output explanation and counterfactual r...
arXiv:2602. 06337v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Causal inference is essential for decision-making but remains challenging for non-experts.
arXiv:2608. 03506v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Self-consistency assumes the most frequent answer among sampled reasoning traces is the most reliable, but this can fail in causal reasoning: samples often repeat the same confounding error, and votes fragment across multiple valid answers, letting an invalid answer win despite a valid minority trace.
arXiv:2606. 05972v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Causal graphs provide a high-level language for making mechanisms transparent.
Self-consistency assumes the most frequent answer among sampled reasoning traces is the most reliable, but this can fail in causal reasoning: samples often repeat the same confounding error, and votes fragment across multiple valid answers, letting an invalid answer win despite a valid minority trace. We introduce CALVER (Causal Axiom-Level VERification), a training-free symbolic verifier that scores structured traces against Pearl's causal criteria, including -separation, backdoor adjustment, and intervention, and selects the highest-scoring candidate without consulting a reference answer.
arXiv:2607. 20529v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Model (LLM) ensembles are increasingly used to improve reliability by combining predictions from multiple LLMs.
arXiv:2607. 04293v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Building AI Scientist agents with Large Language Models (LLMs) has recently attracted growing attention.
Loom is a generative consensus framework designed for real‑world root‑cause analysis (RCA) that combines open‑form hypotheses from modular heuristics with a lightweight large language model (LLM) synthesis step. It projects hypotheses into a continuous embedding space and uses an iterative centroid‑based reweighting algorithm to resolve conflicts, producing a single consensus that is then synthesized by one LLM call. On the OpenRCA benchmark Loom matches state‑of‑the‑art autonomous agents on some datasets while achieving significantly higher efficiency—about 26× faster and 33× faster with an 8B‑parameter synthesizer. whyItMatters":"Loom demonstrates how embedding‑space reweighting can bridge the gap between statistical rigor and expressive LLMs, enabling efficient, trustworthy RCA in industrial settings."