因果推荐

A major barrier to deploying current machine learning models lies in their non-reliability to dataset shifts. To resolve this problem, most existing studies attempted to transfer stable information to unseen environments. Particularly, independent causal mechanisms-based methods proposed to remove mutable causal mechanisms via the do-operator. Compared to previous methods, the obtained stable predictors are more effective in identifying stable information. However, a key question remains: which subset of this whole stable information should the model transfer, in order to achieve optimal generalization ability? To answer this question, we present a comprehensive minimax analysis from a causal perspective. Specifically, we first provide a graphical condition for the whole stable set to be optimal. When this condition fails, we surprisingly find with an example that this whole stable set, although can fully exploit stable information, is not the optimal one to transfer. To identify the optimal subset under this case, we propose to estimate the worst-case risk with a novel optimization scheme over the intervention functions on mutable causal mechanisms. We then propose an efficient algorithm to search for the subset with minimal worst-case risk, based on a newly defined equivalence relation between stable subsets. Compared to the exponential cost of exhaustively searching over all subsets, our searching strategy enjoys a polynomial complexity. The effectiveness and efficiency of our methods are demonstrated on synthetic data and the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease.

We introduce the problem of active causal structure learning with advice. In the typical well-studied setting, the learning algorithm is given the essential graph for the observational distribution and is asked to recover the underlying causal directed acyclic graph (DAG) $G^*$ while minimizing the number of interventions made. In our setting, we are additionally given side information about $G^*$ as advice, e.g. a DAG $G$ purported to be $G^*$. We ask whether the learning algorithm can benefit from the advice when it is close to being correct, while still having worst-case guarantees even when the advice is arbitrarily bad. Our work is in the same space as the growing body of research on _algorithms with predictions_. When the advice is a DAG $G$, we design an adaptive search algorithm to recover $G^*$ whose intervention cost is at most $\mathcal{O}(\max\{1, \log \psi\})$ times the cost for verifying $G^*$; here, $\psi$ is a distance measure between $G$ and $G^*$ that is upper bounded by the number of variables $n$, and is exactly 0 when $G=G^*$. Our approximation factor matches the state-of-the-art for the advice-less setting.

We introduce a gradient-based approach for the problem of Bayesian optimal experimental design to learn causal models in a batch setting --- a critical component for causal discovery from finite data where interventions can be costly or risky. Existing methods rely on greedy approximations to construct a batch of experiments while using black-box methods to optimize over a *single target-state* pair to intervene with. In this work, we completely dispose of the black-box optimization techniques and greedy heuristics and instead propose a conceptually simple end-to-end gradient-based optimization procedure to acquire a set of optimal intervention target-value pairs. Such a procedure enables parameterization of the design space to efficiently optimize over a batch of *multi-target-state* interventions, a setting which has hitherto not been explored due to its complexity. We demonstrate that our proposed method outperforms baselines and existing acquisition strategies in both single-target and multi-target settings across a number of synthetic datasets.

We propose causal isotonic calibration, a novel nonparametric method for calibrating predictors of heterogeneous treatment effects. Furthermore, we introduce cross-calibration, a data-efficient variant of calibration that eliminates the need for hold-out calibration sets. Cross-calibration leverages cross-fitted predictors and generates a single calibrated predictor using all available data. Under weak conditions that do not assume monotonicity, we establish that both causal isotonic calibration and cross-calibration achieve fast doubly-robust calibration rates, as long as either the propensity score or outcome regression is estimated accurately in a suitable sense. The proposed causal isotonic calibrator can be wrapped around any black-box learning algorithm, providing robust and distribution-free calibration guarantees while preserving predictive performance.

Propensity-based weighting methods have been widely studied and demonstrated competitive performance in debiased recommendations. Nevertheless, there are still many questions to be addressed. How to estimate the propensity more conducive to debiasing performance? Which metric is more reasonable to measure the quality of the learned propensities? Is it better to make the cross-entropy loss as small as possible when learning propensities? In this paper, we first discuss the potential problems of the previously widely adopted metrics for learned propensities, and propose balanced-mean-squared-error (BMSE) metric for debiased recommendations. Based on BMSE, we propose IPS-V2 and DR-V2 as the estimators of unbiased loss, and theoretically show that IPS-V2 and DR-V2 have greater propensity balancing and smaller variance without sacrificing additional bias. We further propose a co-training method for learning balanced representation and unbiased prediction. Extensive experiments are conducted on three real-world datasets including a large industrial dataset, and the results show that our approach boosts the balancing property and results in enhanced debiasing performance.

Recent work on neural algorithmic reasoning has investigated the reasoning capabilities of neural networks, effectively demonstrating they can learn to execute classical algorithms on unseen data coming from the train distribution. However, the performance of existing neural reasoners significantly degrades on out-of-distribution (OOD) test data, where inputs have larger sizes. In this work, we make an important observation: there are many different inputs for which an algorithm will perform certain intermediate computations identically. This insight allows us to develop data augmentation procedures that, given an algorithm's intermediate trajectory, produce inputs for which the target algorithm would have exactly the same next trajectory step. We ensure invariance in the next-step prediction across such inputs, by employing a self-supervised objective derived by our observation, formalised in a causal graph. We prove that the resulting method, which we call Hint-ReLIC, improves the OOD generalisation capabilities of the reasoner. We evaluate our method on the CLRS algorithmic reasoning benchmark, where we show up to 3x improvements on the OOD test data.

There exist complex patterns behind the decision-making processes of different individuals across different environments. For instance, in a social recommender system, various user behaviors are driven by highly entangled latent factors from two environments, i.e., consuming environment where users consume items and social environment where users connect with each other. Uncovering the disentanglement of these latent factors for users can benefit in enhanced explainability and controllability for recommendation. However, in literature there has been no work on social recommendation capable of disentangling user representations across consuming and social environments. To solve this problem, we study co-disentangled representation learning across different environments via proposing the curriculum co-disentangled representation learning (CurCoDis) model to disentangle the hidden factors for users across both consuming and social environments. To co-disentangle joint representations for user-item consumption and user-user social graph simultaneously, we partition the social graph into equal-size sub-graphs with minimum number of edges being cut, and design a curriculum weighing strategy for subgraph training through measuring the complexity of subgraphs via Descartes' rule of signs. We further develop the prototype-routing optimization mechanism, which achieves co-disentanglement of user representations across consuming and social environments. Extensive experiments for social recommendation demonstrate that our proposed CurCoDis model can significantly outperform state-of-the-art methods on several real-world datasets.

The primary goal in recommendation is to suggest relevant content to users, but optimizing for accuracy often results in recommendations that lack diversity. To remedy this, conventional approaches such as re-ranking improve diversity by *presenting* more diverse items. Here we argue that to promote inherent and prolonged diversity, the system must encourage its *creation*. Towards this, we harness the performative nature of recommendation, and show how learning can incentivize strategic content creators to create diverse content. Our approach relies on a novel form of regularization that anticipates strategic changes to content, and penalizes for content homogeneity. We provide analytic and empirical results that demonstrate when and how diversity can be incentivized, and experimentally demonstrate the utility of our approach on synthetic and semi-synthetic data.

Estimating heterogeneous treatment effects from observational data is a crucial task across many fields, helping policy and decision-makers take better actions. There has been recent progress on robust and efficient methods for estimating the conditional average treatment effect (CATE) function, but these methods often do not take into account the risk of hidden confounding, which could arbitrarily and unknowingly bias any causal estimate based on observational data. We propose a meta-learner called the B-Learner, which can efficiently learn sharp bounds on the CATE function under limits on the level of hidden confounding. We derive the B-Learner by adapting recent results for sharp and valid bounds of the average treatment effect (Dorn et al., 2021) into the framework given by Kallus & Oprescu (2023) for robust and model-agnostic learning of conditional distributional treatment effects. The B-Learner can use any function estimator such as random forests and deep neural networks, and we prove its estimates are valid, sharp, efficient, and have a quasi-oracle property with respect to the constituent estimators under more general conditions than existing methods. Semi-synthetic experimental comparisons validate the theoretical findings, and we use real-world data demonstrate how the method might be used in practice.

Causal effect estimation has been studied by many researchers when only observational data is available. Sound and complete algorithms have been developed for pointwise estimation of identifiable causal queries. For non-identifiable causal queries, researchers developed polynomial programs to estimate tight bounds on causal effect. However, these are computationally difficult to optimize for variables with large support sizes. In this paper, we analyze the effect of "weak confounding'" on causal estimands. More specifically, under the assumption that the unobserved confounders that render a query non-identifiable have small entropy, we propose an efficient linear program to derive the upper and lower bounds of the causal effect. We show that our bounds are consistent in the sense that as the entropy of unobserved confounders goes to zero, the gap between the upper and lower bound vanishes. Finally, we conduct synthetic and real data simulations to compare our bounds with the bounds obtained by the existing work that cannot incorporate such entropy constraints and show that our bounds are tighter for the setting with weak confounders.

We study the class of location-scale or heteroscedastic noise models (LSNMs), in which the effect $Y$ can be written as a function of the cause $X$ and a noise source $N$ independent of $X$, which may be scaled by a positive function $g$ over the cause, i.e., $Y = f(X) + g(X)N$. Despite the generality of the model class, we show the causal direction is identifiable up to some pathological cases. To empirically validate these theoretical findings, we propose two estimators for LSNMs: an estimator based on (non-linear) feature maps, and one based on neural networks. Both model the conditional distribution of $Y$ given $X$ as a Gaussian parameterized by its natural parameters. When the feature maps are correctly specified, we prove that our estimator is jointly concave, and a consistent estimator for the cause-effect identification task. Although the the neural network does not inherit those guarantees, it can fit functions of arbitrary complexity, and reaches state-of-the-art performance across benchmarks.

Recovering causal relationships from data is an important problem. Using observational data, one can typically only recover causal graphs up to a Markov equivalence class and additional assumptions or interventional data are needed for complete recovery. In this work, under some standard assumptions, we study causal graph discovery via _adaptive interventions with node-dependent interventional costs_. For this setting, we show that no algorithm can achieve an approximation guarantee that is asymptotically better than linear in the number of vertices with respect to the verification number; a well-established benchmark for adaptive search algorithms. Motivated by this negative result, we define a _new benchmark_ that captures the worst-case interventional cost for any search algorithm. Furthermore, with respect to this new benchmark, we provide adaptive search algorithms that achieve logarithmic approximations under various settings: atomic, bounded size interventions and generalized cost objectives.

With recent advances in natural language processing, rationalization becomes an essential self-explaining diagram to disentangle the black box by selecting a subset of input texts to account for the major variation in prediction. Yet, existing association-based approaches on rationalization cannot identify true rationales when two or more snippets are highly inter-correlated and thus provide a similar contribution to prediction accuracy, so-called spuriousness. To address this limitation, we novelly leverage two causal desiderata, non-spuriousness and efficiency, into rationalization from the causal inference perspective. We formally define a series of probabilities of causation based on a newly proposed structural causal model of rationalization, with its theoretical identification established as the main component of learning necessary and sufficient rationales. The superior performance of the proposed causal rationalization is demonstrated on real-world review and medical datasets with extensive experiments compared to state-of-the-art methods.

We consider the problem of computing bounds for causal queries on quasi-Markovian graphs with unobserved confounders and discrete valued observed variables, where identifiability does not hold. Existing non-parametric approaches for computing such bounds use multilinear programming (MP) formulations that are often intractable for existing solvers when the degree of the polynomial objective is greater than two. Hence, one often has to resort to either fast approximate heuristics which are not guaranteed to contain the true query value, or more accurate but computationally intensive procedures. We show how to construct an equivalent MP with a polynomial objective of lower degree. In particular, the degree of the objective in the new MP is equal to only the number of C-components that are intervened upon, instead of the total number of C-components. As a result, we can compute exact bounds for significantly larger causal inference problems as compared to what is possible using existing techniques. We also propose a very efficient Frank-Wolfe heuristic that produces very high quality bounds, and scales to large multilinear problems of higher degree.

When launching a new product, historical sales data is often not available, leaving price as a crucial experimental instrument for sellers to gauge market response. When designing pricing experiments, there are three fundamental objectives: estimating the causal effect of price (i.e., price elasticity), maximizing the expected revenue through the experiment, and controlling the tail risk suffering from a very huge loss. In this paper, we reveal the relationship among such three objectives. Under a linear structural model, we investigate the trade-offs between causal inference and expected revenue maximization, as well as between expected revenue maximization and tail risk control. Furthermore, we propose an optimal pricing experimental design, which can flexibly adapt to different desired levels of trade-offs. Through the optimal design, we also explore the relationship between causal inference and tail risk control.

Causal representation learning seeks to extract high-level latent factors from low-level sensory data. Most existing methods rely on observational data and structural assumptions (e.g., conditional independence) to identify the latent factors. However, interventional data is prevalent across applications. Can interventional data facilitate causal representation learning? We explore this question in this paper. The key observation is that interventional data often carries geometric signatures of the latent factors' support (i.e. what values each latent can possibly take). For example, when the latent factors are causally connected, interventions can break the dependency between the intervened latents' support and their ancestors'. Leveraging this fact, we prove that the latent causal factors can be identified up to permutation and scaling given data from perfect do interventions. Moreover, we can achieve block affine identification, namely the estimated latent factors are only entangled with a few other latents if we have access to data from imperfect interventions. These results highlight the unique power of interventional data in causal representation learning; they can enable provable identification of latent factors without any assumptions about their distributions or dependency structure.

Collaborative causal inference (CCI) aims to improve the estimation of the causal effect of treatment variables by utilizing data aggregated from multiple self-interested parties. Since their source data are valuable proprietary assets that can be costly or tedious to obtain, every party has to be incentivized to be willing to contribute to the collaboration, such as with a guaranteed fair and sufficiently valuable reward (than performing causal inference on its own). This paper presents a reward scheme designed using the unique statistical properties that are required by causal inference to guarantee certain desirable incentive criteria (e.g., fairness, benefit) for the parties based on their contributions. To achieve this, we propose a data valuation function to value parties' data for CCI based on the distributional closeness of its resulting treatment effect estimate to that utilizing the aggregated data from all parties. Then, we show how to value the parties' rewards fairly based on a modified variant of the Shapley value arising from our proposed data valuation for CCI. Finally, the Shapley fair rewards to the parties are realized in the form of improved, stochastically perturbed treatment effect estimates. We empirically demonstrate the effectiveness of our reward scheme using simulated and real-world datasets.

This study explores the impact of content creators' competition on user welfare in recommendation platforms, as well as the long-term dynamics of relevance-driven recommendations. We establish a model of creator competition, under the setting where the platform uses a top-$K$ recommendation policy, user decisions are guided by the Random Utility model, and creators, in absence of explicit utility functions, employ arbitrary no-regret learning algorithms for strategy updates. We study the user welfare guarantee through the lens of Price of Anarchy and show that the fraction of user welfare loss due to creator competition is always upper bounded by a small constant depending on $K$ and randomness in user decisions; we also prove the tightness of this bound. Our result discloses an intrinsic merit of the relevance-driven recommendation policy, as long as users' decisions involve randomness and the platform provides reasonably many alternatives to its users.

The geometric structure of data is an important inductive bias in machine learning. In this work, we characterize the data manifolds entailed by structural causal models. The strengths of the proposed framework are twofold: firstly, the geometric structure of the data manifolds is causally informed, and secondly, it enables causal reasoning about the data manifolds in an interventional and a counterfactual sense. We showcase the versatility of the proposed framework by applying it to the generation of causally-grounded counterfactual explanations for machine learning classifiers, measuring distances along the data manifold in a differential geometric-principled manner.

Weighting methods in causal inference have been widely used to achieve a desirable level of covariate balancing. However, the existing weighting methods have desirable theoretical properties only when a certain model, either the propensity score or outcome regression model, is correctly specified. In addition, the corresponding estimators do not behave well for finite samples due to large variance even when the model is correctly specified. In this paper, we consider to use the integral probability metric (IPM), which is a metric between two probability measures, for covariate balancing. Optimal weights are determined so that weighted empirical distributions for the treated and control groups have the smallest IPM value for a given set of discriminators. We prove that the corresponding estimator can be consistent without correctly specifying any model (neither the propensity score nor the outcome regression model). In addition, we empirically show that our proposed method outperforms existing weighting methods with large margins for finite samples.