Causal Recommendation

This paper focuses on the design of spatial experiments to optimize the amount of information derived from the experimental data and enhance the accuracy of the resulting causal effect estimator. We propose a surrogate function for the mean squared error (MSE) of the estimator, which facilitates the use of classical graph cut algorithms to learn the optimal design. Our proposal offers three key advances: (1) it accommodates moderate to large spatial interference effects; (2) it adapts to different spatial covariance functions; (3) it is computationally efficient. Theoretical results and numerical experiments based on synthetic environments and a dispatch simulator that models a city-scale ridesharing market, further validate the effectiveness of our design. A python implementation of our method is available at https://github.com/Mamba413/CausalGraphCut.

In decision-making problems, the outcome of an intervention often depends on the causal relationships between system components and is highly costly to evaluate. In such settings, causal Bayesian optimization (CBO) exploits the causal relationships between the system variables and sequentially performs interventions to approach the optimum with minimal data. Extending CBO to the multi-outcome setting, we propose *multi-objective Causal Bayesian optimization* (MO-CBO), a paradigm for identifying Pareto-optimal interventions within a known multi-target causal graph. Our methodology first reduces the search space by discarding sub-optimal interventions based on the structure of the given causal graph. We further show that any MO-CBO problem can be decomposed into several traditional multi-objective optimization tasks. Our proposed MO-CBO algorithm is designed to identify Pareto-optimal interventions by iteratively exploring these underlying tasks, guided by relative hypervolume improvement. Experiments on synthetic and real-world causal graphs demonstrate the superiority of our approach over non-causal multi-objective Bayesian optimization in settings where causal information is available.

Reward models are widely used as proxies for human preferences when aligning or evaluating LLMs. However, reward models are black boxes, and it is often unclear what, exactly, they are actually rewarding. In this paper we develop Rewrite-based Attribute Treatment Estimator (RATE) as an effective method for measuring the sensitivity of a reward model to high-level attributes of responses, such as sentiment, helpfulness, or complexity. Importantly, RATE measures the *causal* effect of an attribute on the reward. RATE uses LLMs to rewrite responses to produce imperfect counterfactuals examples that can be used to measure causal effects. A key challenge is that these rewrites are imperfect in a manner that can induce substantial bias in the estimated sensitivity of the reward model to the attribute. The core idea of RATE is to adjust for this imperfect-rewrite effect by rewriting *twice*. We establish the validity of the RATE procedure and show empirically that it is an effective estimator.

Estimating causal effects is crucial for decision-makers in many applications, but it is particularly challenging with observational network data due to peer interactions. Some algorithms have been proposed to estimate causal effects involving network data, particularly peer effects, but they often fail to tell apart diverse peer effects. To address this issue, we propose a general setting which considers both peer direct effects and peer indirect effects, and the effect of an individual's own treatment, and provide the identification conditions of these causal effects. To differentiate these effects, we leverage causal mediation analysis and tailor it specifically for network data. Furthermore, given the inherent challenges of accurately estimating effects in networked environments, we propose to incorporate attention mechanisms to capture the varying influences of different neighbors and to explore high-order neighbor effects using multi-layer graph neural networks (GNNs). Additionally, we employ the Hilbert-Schmidt Independence Criterion (HSIC) to further enhance the model’s robustness and accuracy. Extensive experiments on two semi-synthetic datasets derived from real-world networks and on a dataset from a recommendation system confirm the effectiveness of our approach. Our findings have the potential to improve intervention strategies in networked systems, particularly in social networks and public health.

We employ a game-theoretic framework to study the impact of a specific strategic behavior among creators---group behavior---on recommendation platforms. In this setting, creators within a group collaborate to maximize their collective utility. We show that group behavior has a limited effect on the game's equilibrium when the group size is small. However, when the group size is large, group behavior can significantly alter content distribution and user welfare. Specifically, in a top-$K$ recommendation system with exposure-based rewards, we demonstrate that user welfare can suffer a significant loss due to group strategies, and user welfare does not necessarily increase with larger values of $K$ or more random matching, contrasting sharply with the individual creator case. Furthermore, we investigate user welfare guarantees through the lens of the Price of Anarchy (PoA). In the general case, we establish a negative result on the bound of PoA with exposure rewards, proving that it can be arbitrarily large. We then investigate a user engagement rewarding mechanism, which mitigates the issues caused by large group behavior, showing that $\text{PoA}\leq K+1$ in the general case and $\text{PoA}\leq 2$ in the binary case. Empirical results from simulations further support the effectiveness of the user engagement rewarding mechanism.

We study the problem of classification with selectively labeled data, whose distribution may differ from the full population due to historical decision-making. We exploit the fact that in many applications historical decisions were made by multiple decision-makers, each with different decision rules. We analyze this setup under a principled instrumental variable (IV) framework and rigorously study the identification of classification risk. We establish conditions for the exact identification of classification risk and derive tight partial identification bounds when exact identification fails. We further propose a unified cost-sensitive learning (UCL) approach to learn classifiers robust to selection bias in both identification settings. Finally, we theoretically and numerically validate the efficacy of our proposed method.

A major challenge in estimating treatment effects in observational studies is the reliance on untestable conditions such as the assumption of no unmeasured confounding. In this work, we propose an algorithm that can falsify the assumption of no unmeasured confounding in a setting with observational data from multiple heterogeneous sources, which we refer to as environments. Our proposed falsification strategy leverages a key observation that unmeasured confounding can cause observed causal mechanisms to appear dependent. Building on this observation, we develop a novel two-stage procedure that detects these dependencies with high statistical power while controlling false positives. The algorithm does not require access to randomized data and, in contrast to other falsification approaches, functions even under transportability violations when the environment has a direct effect on the outcome of interest. To showcase the practical relevance of our approach, we show that our method is able to efficiently detect confounding on both simulated and semi-synthetic data.

Reward modelling from preference data is a crucial step in aligning large language models (LLMs) with human values, requiring robust generalisation to novel prompt-response pairs. In this work, we propose to frame this problem in a causal paradigm, providing the rich toolbox of causality to identify the persistent challenges, such as causal misidentification, preference heterogeneity, and confounding due to user-specific factors. Inheriting from the literature of casual inference, we identify key assumptions necessary for reliable generalisation and contrast them with common data collection practices. We illustrate failure modes of naive reward models and demonstrate how causally-inspired approaches can improve model robustness. Finally, we outline desiderata for future research and practices, advocating targeted interventions to address inherent limitations of observational data.

Although Recommender Systems (RS) have been well-developed for various fields of applications, they often suffer from a crisis of platform credibility with respect to RS confidence and fairness, which may drive users away, threatening the platform's long-term success. In recent years, some works have tried to solve these issues; however, they lack strong statistical guarantees. Therefore, there is an urgent need to solve both issues with a unifying framework with robust statistical guarantees. In this paper, we propose a novel and reliable framework called Equitable and Statistically Unbiased Recommendation (ENSUR)) to dynamically generate prediction sets for users across various groups, which are guaranteed 1) to include ground-truth items with user-predefined high confidence/probability (e.g., 90\%); 2) to ensure user fairness across different groups; 3) to have minimum efficient average prediction set sizes. We further design an efficient algorithm named Guaranteed User Fairness Algorithm (GUFA) to optimize the proposed method and derive upper bounds of risk and fairness metrics to speed up the optimization process. Moreover, we provide rigorous theoretical analysis concerning risk and fairness control and minimum set size. Extensive experiments validate the effectiveness of the proposed framework, which aligns with our theoretical analysis.

Uplift modeling is crucial for identifying individuals likely to respond to a treatment in applications like marketing and customer retention, but evaluating these models is challenging due to the inaccessibility of counterfactual outcomes in real-world settings. In this paper, we identify a fundamental limitation in existing evaluation metrics, such as the uplift and Qini curves, which fail to rank individuals with binary negative outcomes accurately. This can lead to biased evaluations, where biased models receive higher curve values than unbiased ones, resulting in suboptimal model selection. To address this, we propose the Principled Uplift Curve (PUC), a novel evaluation metric that assigns equal curve values of individuals with both positive and negative binary outcomes, offering a more balanced and unbiased assessment. We then derive the Principled Uplift Loss (PUL) function from the PUC and integrate it into a new uplift model, the Principled Treatment and Outcome Network (PTONet), to reduce bias during uplift model training. Experiments on both simulated and real-world datasets demonstrate that the PUC provides less biased evaluations, while PTONet outperforms existing methods. The source code is available at: https://github.com/euzmin/PUC.

Estimating causal effects of joint interventions on multiple variables is crucial in many domains, but obtaining data from such simultaneous interventions can be challenging. Our study explores how to learn joint interventional effects using only observational data and single-variable interventions. We present an identifiability result for this problem, showing that for a class of nonlinear additive outcome mechanisms, joint effects can be inferred without access to joint interventional data. We propose a practical estimator that decomposes the causal effect into confounded and unconfounded contributions for each intervention variable. Experiments on synthetic data demonstrate that our method achieves performance comparable to models trained directly on joint interventional data, outperforming a purely observational estimator.

We consider the problem of selecting instrumental variables from observational data, a fundamental challenge in causal inference. Existing methods mostly focus on additive linear, constant effects models, limiting their applicability in complex real-world scenarios. In this paper, we tackle a more general and challenging setting: the additive non-linear, constant effects model. We first propose a novel testable condition, termed the Cross Auxiliary-based independent Test (CAT) condition, for selecting the valid IV set. We show that this condition is both necessary and sufficient for identifying valid instrumental variable sets within such a model under milder assumptions. Building on this condition, we develop a practical algorithm for selecting the set of valid instrumental variables. Extensive experiments on both synthetic and two real-world datasets demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of our proposed approach, highlighting its potential for broader applications in causal analysis.

Generative recommendation (GR) is an emerging paradigm where user actions are tokenized into discrete token patterns and autoregressively generated as predictions. However, existing GR models tokenize each action independently, assigning the same fixed tokens to identical actions across all sequences without considering contextual relationships. This lack of context-awareness can lead to suboptimal performance, as the same action may hold different meanings depending on its surrounding context. To address this issue, we propose ActionPiece to explicitly incorporate context when tokenizing action sequences. In ActionPiece, each action is represented as a *set* of item features. Given the action sequence corpora, we construct the vocabulary by merging feature patterns as new tokens, based on their co-occurrence frequency both within individual sets and across adjacent sets. Considering the unordered nature of feature sets, we further introduce set permutation regularization, which produces multiple segmentations of action sequences with the same semantics. Our code is available at: https://github.com/google-deepmind/action_piece.

Bivariate structural causal models (SCM) are often used to infer causal direction by examining their goodness-of-fit under restricted model classes. In this paper, we describe a parametrization of bivariate SCMs in terms of a *causal velocity* by viewing the cause variable as time in a dynamical system. The velocity implicitly defines counterfactual curves via the solution of initial value problems where the observation specifies the initial condition. Using tools from measure transport, we obtain a unique correspondence between SCMs and the score function of the generated distribution via its causal velocity. Based on this, we derive an objective function that directly regresses the velocity against the score function, the latter of which can be estimated non-parametrically from observational data. We use this to develop a method for bivariate causal discovery that extends beyond known model classes such as additive or location-scale noise, and that requires no assumptions on the noise distributions. When the score is estimated well, the objective is also useful for detecting model non–identifiability and misspecification. We present positive results in simulation and benchmark experiments where many existing methods fail, and perform ablation studies to examine the method's sensitivity to accurate score estimation.

Researchers and practitioners often wish to measure treatment effects in settings where units interact via markets and recommendation systems. In these settings, units are affected by certain *shared states*, like prices, algorithmic recommendations or social signals. We formalize this structure, calling it shared-state interference, and argue that our formulation captures many relevant applied settings. Our key modeling assumption is that individuals' potential outcomes are independent conditional on the shared state. We then prove an extension of a double machine learning (DML) theorem providing conditions for achieving efficient inference under shared-state interference. We also instantiate our general theorem in several models of interest where it is possible to efficiently estimate the average direct effect (ADE) or global average treatment effect (GATE).

Causal inference seeks to estimate the effect given a treatment such as a medicine or the dosage of a medication. To reduce the confounding bias caused by the non-randomized treatment assignment, most existing methods reduce the shift between subpopulations receiving different treatments. However, these methods split limited training samples into smaller groups, which cuts down the number of samples in each group, while precise distribution estimation and alignment highly rely on a sufficient number of training samples. In this paper, we propose a distribution alignment paradigm without data splitting, which can be naturally applied in the settings of binary and continuous treatments. To this end, we characterize the confounding bias by considering different probability measures of the same set including all the training samples, and exploit the optimal transport theory to analyze the confounding bias and outcome estimation error. Based on this, we propose to learn balanced representations by reducing the bias between the marginal distribution and the conditional distribution of a treatment. As a result, data reduction caused by splitting is avoided, and the outcome prediction model trained on one treatment group can be generalized to the entire population. The experiments on both binary and continuous treatment settings demonstrate the effectiveness of our method.

Generalizing causal effects from Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) to target populations across diverse environments is of significant practical importance, as RCTs are often costly and logistically complex to conduct. A key challenge is environmental shift, defined as changes in the distribution and availability of covariates between source and target environments. A common approach addressing this challenge is to identify a separating set--covariates that govern both treatment effect heterogeneity and environmental differences--and combine RCT samples with target populations matched on this set. However, this approach assumes that the separating set is fully observed and shared across datasets, an assumption often violated in practice. We propose a novel Two-Stage Doubly Robust (2SDR) method that relaxes this assumption by allowing the separating set to be observed in only one of the two datasets. 2SDR leverages shadow variables to impute missing components of the separating set and generalize treatment effects across environments in a two-stage procedure. We show the identification of causal effects in target environments under 2SDR and demonstrate its effectiveness through extensive experiments on both synthetic and real-world datasets.

As language technologies become widespread, it is important to understand how changes in language affect reader perceptions and behaviors. These relationships may be formalized as the *isolated causal effect* of some *focal* language-encoded intervention (e.g., factual inaccuracies) on an external outcome (e.g., readers' beliefs). In this paper, we introduce a formal estimation framework for isolated causal effects of language. We show that a core challenge of estimating isolated effects is the need to approximate all *non-focal* language outside of the intervention. Drawing on the principle of *omitted variable bias*, we provide measures for evaluating the quality of both non-focal language approximations and isolated effect estimates themselves. We find that poor approximation of non-focal language can lead to bias in the corresponding isolated effect estimates due to omission of relevant variables, and we show how to assess the sensitivity of effect estimates to such bias along the two key axes of *fidelity* and *overlap*. In experiments on semi-synthetic and real-world data, we validate the ability of our framework to correctly recover isolated effects and demonstrate the utility of our proposed measures.

The study of causal abstractions bridges two integral components of human intelligence: the ability to determine cause and effect, and the ability to interpret complex patterns into abstract concepts. Formally, causal abstraction frameworks define connections between complicated low-level causal models and simple high-level ones. One major limitation of most existing definitions is that they are not well-defined when considering lossy abstraction functions in which multiple low-level interventions can have different effects while mapping to the same high-level intervention (an assumption called the abstract invariance condition). In this paper, we introduce a new type of abstractions called projected abstractions that generalize existing definitions to accommodate lossy representations. We show how to construct a projected abstraction from the low-level model and how it translates equivalent observational, interventional, and counterfactual causal queries from low to high-level. Given that the true model is rarely available in practice we prove a new graphical criteria for identifying and estimating high-level causal queries from limited low-level data. Finally, we experimentally show the effectiveness of projected abstraction models in high-dimensional image settings.

Causal inference is a key research area in machine learning, yet confusion reigns over the tools needed to tackle it. There are prevalent claims in the machine learning literature that you need a bespoke causal framework or notation to answer causal questions. In this paper, we make it clear that you can answer any causal inference question within the realm of probabilistic modelling and inference, without causal-specific tools or notation. Through concrete examples, we demonstrate how causal questions can be tackled by writing down the probability of everything. We argue for the advantages of the generality of the probabilistic modelling lens, when compared to bespoke causal frameworks. Lastly, we reinterpret causal tools as emerging from standard probabilistic modelling and inference, elucidating their necessity and utility.