arXiv:2608. 19831v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Causal Bayesian networks (CBNs) and structural causal models (SCMs) are the dominant frameworks for graphical causal reasoning, but they cannot adequately represent all real-world causal systems.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
The paper investigates why causal Bayesian networks are labeled as causal, noting that interventions are defined within the model while predictions refer to real-world actions. It introduces a formal framework that separates the causal model from the data-generating process and formalizes how actions map to interventions. The authors prove an impossibility result showing that no non‑circular interpretation can satisfy all desirable properties, and they explore the consequences for falsification, causal discovery, representation learning, and abstraction.
arXiv:2607. 22910v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Pearl's structural causal model (SCM) framework, built on directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) and the do-calculus, is the dominant formal language for causal reasoning.
arXiv:2609.06941v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Causal effect estimation asks how an outcome would change under an intervention, and medicine, economics, and public policy all treat it as a foundatio...
The paper introduces a formal framework that uses symmetries in data to keep causal mechanisms invariant, providing a simple and general mathematical language for causal reasoning. It outlines how to describe models and queries, and presents strategies for rigorously identifying causal effects from data within this framework. The approach reproduces known results for IID data and extends causal analysis to non‑IID settings, complex queries beyond do‑ or soft‑interventions, and incorporates missing data, transfer, and robustness considerations.
The paper introduces CausalBridge, a framework that uses causal structure to assign semantics to unnamed variables in numerical measurements. By discovering a causal graph from the data and solving for variable embeddings constrained by this graph, the method aligns variable meanings with a language model, outperforming association‑based approaches. Experiments on questionnaires and robotics scenarios show high accuracy even when most variable names are masked, enabling rapid and cost‑effective system naming.
The paper investigates how to determine causal effects when only partial causal information is available, using collections of compatible causal graphs instead of a single fully specified graph. It introduces several formal notions of identifiability for these graph collections and arranges them into a strict hierarchy that clarifies their interrelations. The authors show that a causal effect can be identified across a set of graphs even when no single causal derivation applies uniformly to all of them, thereby exposing gaps and ambiguities in prior work.