NeurIPS 2024 Papers

Estimating causal quantities from observational data is crucial for understanding the safety and effectiveness of medical treatments. However, to make reliable inferences, medical practitioners require not only estimating averaged causal quantities, such as the conditional average treatment effect, but also understanding the randomness of the treatment effect as a random variable. This randomness is referred to as aleatoric uncertainty and is necessary for understanding the probability of benefit from treatment or quantiles of the treatment effect. Yet, the aleatoric uncertainty of the treatment effect has received surprisingly little attention in the causal machine learning community. To fill this gap, we aim to quantify the aleatoric uncertainty of the treatment effect at the covariate-conditional level, namely, the conditional distribution of the treatment effect (CDTE). Unlike average causal quantities, the CDTE is not point identifiable without strong additional assumptions. As a remedy, we employ partial identification to obtain sharp bounds on the CDTE and thereby quantify the aleatoric uncertainty of the treatment effect. We then develop a novel, orthogonal learner for the bounds on the CDTE, which we call AU-learner. We further show that our AU-learner has several strengths in that it satisfies Neyman-orthogonality and, thus, quasi-oracle efficiency. Finally, we propose a fully-parametric deep learning instantiation of our AU-learner.

Artificial intelligence systems are trained combining various observational and experimental datasets from different source sites, and are increasingly used to reason about the effectiveness of candidate policies. One common assumption in this context is that the data in source and target sites (where the candidate policy is due to be deployed) come from the same distribution. This assumption is often violated in practice, causing challenges for generalization, transportability, or external validity. Despite recent advances for determining the identifiability of the effectiveness of policies in a target domain, there are still challenges for the accurate estimation of effects from finite samples. In this paper, we develop novel graphical criteria and estimators for evaluating the effectiveness of policies (e.g., conditional, stochastic) by combining data from multiple experimental studies. Asymptotic error analysis of our estimators provides fast convergence guarantee. We empirically verified the robustness of estimators through simulations.

Identifying causal relations from purely observational data typically requires additional assumptions on relations and/or noise. Most current methods restrict their analysis to datasets that are assumed to have pure linear or nonlinear relations, which is often not reflective of real-world datasets that contain a combination of both. This paper presents CaPS, an ordering-based causal discovery algorithm that effectively handles linear and nonlinear relations. CaPS introduces a novel identification criterion for topological ordering and incorporates the concept of "parent score" during the post-processing optimization stage. These scores quantify the strength of the average causal effect, helping to accelerate the pruning process and correct inaccurate predictions in the pruning step. Experimental results demonstrate that our proposed solutions outperform state-of-the-art baselines on synthetic data with varying ratios of linear and nonlinear relations. The results obtained from real-world data also support the competitiveness of CaPS. Code and datasets are available at https://github.com/E2real/CaPS.

We study the identification of causal effects, motivated by two improvements to identifiability which can be attained if one knows that some variables in a causal graph are functionally determined by their parents (without needing to know the specific functions). First, an unidentifiable causal effect may become identifiable when certain variables are functional. Second, certain functional variables can be excluded from being observed without affecting the identifiability of a causal effect, which may significantly reduce the number of needed variables in observational data. Our results are largely based on an elimination procedure which removes functional variables from a causal graph while preserving key properties in the resulting causal graph, including the identifiability of causal effects.

Counterfactual reasoning is pivotal in human cognition and especially important for providing explanations and making decisions. While Judea Pearl's influential approach is theoretically elegant, its generation of a counterfactual scenario often requires too much deviation from the observed scenarios to be feasible, as we show using simple examples. To mitigate this difficulty, we propose a framework of natural counterfactuals and a method for generating counterfactuals that are more feasible with respect to the actual data distribution. Our methodology incorporates a certain amount of backtracking when needed, allowing changes in causally preceding variables to minimize deviations from realistic scenarios. Specifically, we introduce a novel optimization framework that permits but also controls the extent of backtracking with a "naturalness'' criterion. Empirical experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our method. The code is available at https://github.com/GuangyuanHao/natural_counterfactuals.

Conditional independence tests are crucial across various disciplines in determining the independence of an outcome variable $Y$ from a treatment variable $X$, conditioning on a set of confounders $Z$. The Conditional Randomization Test (CRT) offers a powerful framework for such testing by assuming known distributions of $X \mid Z$; it controls the Type-I error exactly, allowing for the use of flexible, black-box test statistics. In practice, testing for conditional independence often involves using data from a source population to draw conclusions about a target population. This can be challenging due to covariate shift---differences in the distribution of $X$, $Z$, and surrogate variables, which can affect the conditional distribution of $Y \mid X, Z$---rendering traditional CRT approaches invalid. To address this issue, we propose a novel Covariate Shift Corrected Pearson Chi-squared Conditional Randomization (csPCR) test. This test adapts to covariate shifts by integrating importance weights and employing the control variates method to reduce variance in the test statistics and thus enhance power. Theoretically, we establish that the csPCR test controls the Type-I error asymptotically. Empirically, through simulation studies, we demonstrate that our method not only maintains control over Type-I errors but also exhibits superior power, confirming its efficacy and practical utility in real-world scenarios where covariate shifts are prevalent. Finally, we apply our methodology to a real-world dataset to assess the impact of a COVID-19 treatment on the 90-day mortality rate among patients.

Causal representation learning promises to extend causal models to hidden causal variables from raw entangled measurements. However, most progress has focused on proving identifiability results in different settings, and we are not aware of any successful real-world application. At the same time, the field of dynamical systems benefited from deep learning and scaled to countless applications but does not allow parameter identification. In this paper, we draw a clear connection between the two and their key assumptions, allowing us to apply identifiable methods developed in causal representation learning to dynamical systems. At the same time, we can leverage scalable differentiable solvers developed for differential equations to build models that are both identifiable and practical. Overall, we learn explicitly controllable models that isolate the trajectory-specific parameters for further downstream tasks such as out-of-distribution classification or treatment effect estimation. We experiment with a wind simulator with partially known factors of variation. We also apply the resulting model to real-world climate data and successfully answer downstream causal questions in line with existing literature on climate change.

This paper studies off-policy evaluation (OPE) in the presence of unmeasured confounders. Inspired by the two-way fixed effects regression model widely used in the panel data literature, we propose a two-way unmeasured confounding assumption to model the system dynamics in causal reinforcement learning and develop a two-way deconfounder algorithm that devises a neural tensor network to simultaneously learn both the unmeasured confounders and the system dynamics, based on which a model-based estimator can be constructed for consistent policy value estimation. We illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed estimator through theoretical results and numerical experiments.

We study the evaluation of a policy under best- and worst-case perturbations to a Markov decision process (MDP), using transition observations from the original MDP, whether they are generated under the same or a different policy. This is an important problem when there is the possibility of a shift between historical and future environments, \emph{e.g.} due to unmeasured confounding, distributional shift, or an adversarial environment. We propose a perturbation model that allows changes in the transition kernel densities up to a given multiplicative factor or its reciprocal, extending the classic marginal sensitivity model (MSM) for single time-step decision-making to infinite-horizon RL. We characterize the sharp bounds on policy value under this model -- \emph{i.e.}, the tightest possible bounds based on transition observations from the original MDP -- and we study the estimation of these bounds from such transition observations. We develop an estimator with several important guarantees: it is semiparametrically efficient, and remains so even when certain necessary nuisance functions, such as worst-case Q-functions, are estimated at slow, nonparametric rates. Our estimator is also asymptotically normal, enabling straightforward statistical inference using Wald confidence intervals. Moreover, when certain nuisances are estimated inconsistently, the estimator still provides valid, albeit possibly not sharp, bounds on the policy value. We validate these properties in numerical simulations. The combination of accounting for environment shifts from train to test (robustness), being insensitive to nuisance-function estimation (orthogonality), and addressing the challenge of learning from finite samples (inference) together leads to credible and reliable policy evaluation.

Recent text-based causal methods attempt to mitigate confounding bias by estimating proxies of confounding variables that are partially or imperfectly measured from unstructured text data. These approaches, however, assume analysts have supervised labels of the confounders given text for a subset of instances, a constraint that is sometimes infeasible due to data privacy or annotation costs. In this work, we address settings in which an important confounding variable is completely unobserved. We propose a new causal inference method that uses two instances of pre-treatment text data, infers two proxies using two zero-shot models on the separate instances, and applies these proxies in the proximal g-formula. We prove, under certain assumptions about the instances of text and accuracy of the zero-shot predictions, that our method of inferring text-based proxies satisfies identification conditions of the proximal g-formula while other seemingly reasonable proposals do not. To address untestable assumptions associated with our method and the proximal g-formula, we further propose an odds ratio falsification heuristic that flags when to proceed with downstream effect estimation using the inferred proxies. We evaluate our method in synthetic and semi-synthetic settings---the latter with real-world clinical notes from MIMIC-III and open large language models for zero-shot prediction---and find that our method produces estimates with low bias. We believe that this text-based design of proxies allows for the use of proximal causal inference in a wider range of scenarios, particularly those for which obtaining suitable proxies from structured data is difficult.

Imitation learning enables an agent to learn from expert demonstrations when the performance measure is unknown and the reward signal is not specified. Standard imitation methods do not generally apply when the learner and the expert's sensory capabilities mismatch and demonstrations are contaminated with unobserved confounding bias. To address these challenges, recent advancements in causal imitation learning have been pursued. However, these methods often require access to underlying causal structures that might not always be available, posing practical challenges. In this paper, we investigate robust imitation learning within the framework of canonical Markov Decision Processes (MDPs) using partial identification, allowing the agent to achieve expert performance even when the system dynamics are not uniquely determined from the confounded expert demonstrations. Specifically, first, we theoretically demonstrate that when unobserved confounders (UCs) exist in an MDP, the learner is generally unable to imitate expert performance. We then explore imitation learning in partially identifiable settings --- either transition distribution or reward function is non-identifiable from the available data and knowledge. Augmenting the celebrated GAIL method (Ho \& Ermon, 2016), our analysis leads to two novel causal imitation algorithms that can obtain effective policies guaranteed to achieve expert performance.

Causal Temporal Representation Learning (Ctrl) methods aim to identify the temporal causal dynamics of complex nonstationary temporal sequences. Despite the success of existing Ctrl methods, they require either directly observing the domain variables or assuming a Markov prior on them. Such requirements limit the application of these methods in real-world scenarios when we do not have such prior knowledge of the domain variables. To address this problem, this work adopts a sparse transition assumption, aligned with intuitive human understanding, and presents identifiability results from a theoretical perspective. In particular, we explore under what conditions on the significance of the variability of the transitions we can build a model to identify the distribution shifts. Based on the theoretical result, we introduce a novel framework, *Causal Temporal Representation Learning with Nonstationary Sparse Transition* (CtrlNS), designed to leverage the constraints on transition sparsity and conditional independence to reliably identify both distribution shifts and latent factors. Our experimental evaluations on synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate significant improvements over existing baselines, highlighting the effectiveness of our approach.

Machine Learning and AI have the potential to transform data-driven scientific discovery, enabling accurate predictions for several scientific phenomena. As many scientific questions are inherently causal, this paper looks at the causal inference task of treatment effect estimation, where the outcome of interest is recorded in high-dimensional observations in a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT). Despite being the simplest possible causal setting and a perfect fit for deep learning, we theoretically find that many common choices in the literature may lead to biased estimates. To test the practical impact of these considerations, we recorded ISTAnt, the first real-world benchmark for causal inference downstream tasks on high-dimensional observations as an RCT studying how garden ants (Lasius neglectus) respond to microparticles applied onto their colony members by hygienic grooming. Comparing 6 480 models fine-tuned from state-of-the-art visual backbones, we find that the sampling and modeling choices significantly affect the accuracy of the causal estimate, and that classification accuracy is not a proxy thereof. We further validated the analysis, repeating it on a synthetically generated visual data set controlling the causal model. Our results suggest that future benchmarks should carefully consider real downstream scientific questions, especially causal ones. Further, we highlight guidelines for representation learning methods to help answer causal questions in the sciences.

Intervention Target Estimation (ITE) is vital for both understanding and decision-making in complex systems, yet it remains underexplored. Current ITE methods are hampered by their inability to learn from distinct intervention instances collaboratively and to incorporate rich insights from labeled data, which leads to inefficiencies such as the need for re-estimation of intervention targets with minor data changes or alterations in causal graphs. In this paper, we propose DeepITE, an innovative deep learning framework designed around a variational graph autoencoder. DeepITE can concurrently learn from both unlabeled and labeled data with different intervention targets and causal graphs, harnessing correlated information in a self or semi-supervised manner. The model's inference capabilities allow for the immediate identification of intervention targets on unseen samples and novel causal graphs, circumventing the need for retraining. Our extensive testing confirms that DeepITE not only surpasses 13 baseline methods in the Recall@k metric but also demonstrates expeditious inference times, particularly on large graphs. Moreover, incorporating a modest fraction of labeled data (5-10\%) substantially enhances DeepITE's performance, further solidifying its practical applicability. Our source code is available at https://github.com/alipay/DeepITE.

Recent progress in Neural Causal Models (NCMs) showcased how identification and partial identification of causal effects can be automatically carried out via training of neural generative models that respect the constraints encoded in a given causal graph [Xia et al. 2022, Balazadeh et al. 2022]. However, formal consistency of these methods has only been proven for the case of discrete variables or only for linear causal models. In this work, we prove the consistency of partial identification via NCMs in a general setting with both continuous and categorical variables. Further, our results highlight the impact of the design of the underlying neural network architecture in terms of depth and connectivity as well as the importance of applying Lipschitz regularization in the training phase. In particular, we provide a counterexample showing that without Lipschitz regularization this method may not be asymptotically consistent. Our results are enabled by new results on the approximability of Structural Causal Models (SCMs) via neural generative models, together with an analysis of the sample complexity of the resulting architectures and how that translates into an error in the constrained optimization problem that defines the partial identification bounds.

Estimating individualized treatment rules (ITRs) is fundamental in causal inference, particularly for precision medicine applications. Traditional ITR estimation methods rely on inverse probability weighting (IPW) to address confounding factors and $L_{1}$-penalization for simplicity and interpretability. However, IPW can introduce statistical bias without precise propensity score modeling, while $L_1$-penalization makes the objective non-smooth, leading to computational bias and requiring subgradient methods. In this paper, we propose a unified ITR estimation framework formulated as a constrained, weighted, and smooth convex optimization problem. The optimal ITR can be robustly and effectively computed by projected gradient descent. Our comprehensive theoretical analysis reveals that weights that balance the spectrum of a `weighted design matrix' improve both the optimization and likelihood landscapes, yielding improved computational and statistical estimation guarantees. In particular, this is achieved by distributional covariate balancing weights, which are model-free alternatives to IPW. Extensive simulations and applications demonstrate that our framework achieves significant gains in both robustness and effectiveness for ITR learning against existing methods.

In safety-critical applications, machine learning models should generalize well under worst-case distribution shifts, that is, have a small robust risk. Invariance-based algorithms can provably take advantage of structural assumptions on the shifts when the training distributions are heterogeneous enough to identify the robust risk. However, in practice, such identifiability conditions are rarely satisfied – a scenario so far underexplored in the theoretical literature. In this paper, we aim to fill the gap and propose to study the more general setting of partially identifiable robustness. In particular, we define a new risk measure, the identifiable robust risk, and its corresponding (population) minimax quantity that is an algorithm-independent measure for the best achievable robustness under partial identifiability. We introduce these concepts broadly, and then study them within the framework of linear structural causal models for concreteness of the presentation. We use the introduced minimax quantity to show how previous approaches provably achieve suboptimal robustness in the partially identifiable case. We confirm our findings through empirical simulations and real-world experiments and demonstrate how the test error of existing robustness methods grows increasingly suboptimal as the proportion of previously unseen test directions increases.

We consider sequential treatment regimes where each unit is exposed to combinations of interventions over time. When interventions are described by qualitative labels, such as "close schools for a month due to a pandemic" or "promote this podcast to this user during this week", it is unclear which appropriate structural assumptions allow us to generalize behavioral predictions to previously unseen combinations of interventions. Standard black-box approaches mapping sequences of categorical variables to outputs are applicable, but they rely on poorly understood assumptions on how reliable generalization can be obtained, and may underperform under sparse sequences, temporal variability, and large action spaces. To approach that, we pose an explicit model for composition, that is, how the effect of sequential interventions can be isolated into modules, clarifying which data conditions allow for the identification of their combined effect at different units and time steps. We show the identification properties of our compositional model, inspired by advances in causal matrix factorization methods. Our focus is on predictive models for novel compositions of interventions instead of matrix completion tasks and causal effect estimation. We compare our approach to flexible but generic black-box models to illustrate how structure aids prediction in sparse data conditions.

Covariate-adjusted response-adaptive randomization (CARA) designs are gaining increasing attention. These designs combine the advantages of randomized experiments with the ability to adaptively revise treatment allocations based on data collected across multiple stages, enhancing estimation efficiency. Yet, CARA designs often assume that primary outcomes are immediately observable, which is not the case in many clinical scenarios where there is a delay in observing primary outcomes. This assumption can lead to significant missingness and inefficient estimation of treatment effects. To tackle this practical challenge, we propose a CARA experimental strategy integrating delayed primary outcomes with immediately observed surrogate outcomes. Surrogate outcomes are intermediate clinical outcomes that are predictive or correlated with the primary outcome of interest. Our design goal is to improve the estimation efficiency of the average treatment effect (ATE) of the primary outcome utilizing surrogate outcomes. From a methodological perspective, our approach offers two benefits: First, we accommodate arm and covariates-dependent delay mechanisms without imposing any parametric modeling assumptions on the distribution of outcomes. Second, when primary outcomes are not fully observed, surrogate outcomes can guide the adaptive treatment allocation rule. From a theoretical standpoint, we prove the semiparametric efficiency bound of estimating ATE under delayed primary outcomes while incorporating surrogate outcomes. We show that the ATE estimator under our proposed design strategy attains this semiparametric efficiency bound and achieves asymptotic normality. Through theoretical investigations and a synthetic HIV study, we show that our design is more efficient than the design without incorporating any surrogate information.