PreprintCited by 8Bayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)

Causal Deep Learning

Open access
Berrevoets, Jeroen, Kacprzyk, Krzysztof, Qian, Zhaozhi, van der Schaar, Mihaela·2023·arXiv

Abstract

Causality has the potential to truly transform the way we solve a large number of real-world problems. Yet, so far, its potential largely remains to be unlocked as causality often requires crucial assumptions which cannot be tested in practice. To address this challenge, we propose a new way of thinking about causality -- we call this causal deep learning. Our causal deep learning framework spans three dimensions: (1) a structural dimension, which incorporates partial yet testable causal knowledge rather than assuming either complete or no causal knowledge among the variables of interest; (2) a parametric dimension, which encompasses parametric forms that capture the type of relationships among the variables of interest; and (3) a temporal dimension, which captures exposure times or how the variables of interest interact (possibly causally) over time. Causal deep learning enables us to make progress on a variety of real-world problems by leveraging partial causal knowledge (including independencies among variables) and quantitatively characterising causal relationships among variables of interest (possibly over time). Our framework clearly identifies which assumptions are testable and which ones are not, such that the resulting solutions can be judiciously adopted in practice. Using our formulation we can combine or chain together causal representations to solve specific problems without losing track of which assumptions are required to build these solutions, pushing real-world impact in healthcare, economics and business, environmental sciences and education, through causal deep learning.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2303.02186

Cites

148 of 148 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 73

  1. Nick Pawlowski, Jeroen Berrevoets, Caroline Uhler, Kun Zhang, Mihaela van der Schaar, and Cheng Zhang. NeurIPS workshop on causal machine learning for real-world impact (CML4Impact), 2022. URL https://www.cml-4-impact.vanderschaar-lab.com/.
  2. Guido W Imbens. Potential outcome and directed acyclic graph approaches to causality: Relevance for empirical practice in economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 58(4):1129-79, 2020.
  3. Judea Pearl. Bayesianism and causality, or, why i am only a half-bayesian. In Foundations of bayesian- ism, pages 19-36. Springer, 2001.
  4. Daphne Koller and Nir Friedman. Probabilistic graphical models: principles and techniques. MIT press, 2009.
  5. Xiaohai Sun, Dominik Janzing, and Bernhard Schölkopf. Causal inference by choosing graphs with most plausible markov kernels. In Ninth International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence and Mathematics (AIMath 2006), pages 1-11, 2006.
  6. Judea Pearl. Causality. Cambridge university press, 2009.
  7. Vladimir N Vapnik and A Ya Chervonenkis. On the uniform convergence of relative frequencies of events to their probabilities. In Measures of complexity: festschrift for alexey chervonenkis, pages 11-30. Springer, 2015.
  8. Patrik Hoyer, Dominik Janzing, Joris M Mooij, Jonas Peters, and Bernhard Schölkopf. Nonlinear causal discovery with additive noise models. Advances in neural information processing systems, 21, 2008.
  9. Jonas Peters, Dominik Janzing, and Bernhard Schölkopf. Elements of causal inference: foundations and learning algorithms. The MIT Press, 2017.
  10. Michael Naaman. On the tight constant in the multivariate dvoretzky-kiefer-wolfowitz inequality. Statistics & Probability Letters, 173:109088, 2021.
  11. Carlos M Jarque and Anil K Bera. Efficient tests for normality, homoscedasticity and serial indepen- dence of regression residuals. Economics letters, 6(3):255-259, 1980.
  12. Abraham Savitzky and Marcel JE Golay. Smoothing and differentiation of data by simplified least squares procedures. Analytical chemistry, 36(8):1627-1639, 1964.
  13. Xun Zheng, Chen Dan, Bryon Aragam, Pradeep Ravikumar, and Eric Xing. Learning sparse nonpara- metric dags. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 3414-3425. PMLR, 2020.
  14. James M Robins, Miguel Angel Hernan, and Babette Brumback. Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology, pages 550-560, 2000.
  15. Samuel Holt, Jeroen Berrevoets, Krzysztof Kacprzyk, Zhaozhi Qian, and Mihaela van der Schaar. ODE discovery for longitudinal heterogeneous treatment effects inference. In The Twelfth International Con- ference on Learning Representations, 2024. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=pxI5IPeWgW.
  16. Jeroen Berrevoets, Ahmed Alaa, Zhaozhi Qian, James Jordon, Alexander E. S. Gimson, and Mihaela van der Schaar. Learning queueing policies for organ transplantation allocation us- ing interpretable counterfactual survival analysis. In Marina Meila and Tong Zhang, edi- tors, Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 139 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 792-802. PMLR, 18-24 Jul 2021. URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v139/berrevoets21a.html.
  17. Finnian Lattimore, Tor Lattimore, and Mark D Reid. Causal bandits: Learning good interventions via causal inference. In D. Lee, M. Sugiyama, U. Luxburg, I. Guyon, and R. Garnett, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 29.
  18. Curran Associates, Inc., 2016. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2016/file/b4288d9c0ec0a1841b3b3728321e7088-Paper.pdf.
  19. Jennifer L Hill. Bayesian nonparametric modeling for causal inference. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 20(1):217-240, 2011.
  20. Alicia Curth, David Svensson, Jim Weatherall, and Mihaela van der Schaar. Really doing great at estimating cate? a critical look at ml benchmarking practices in treatment effect estimation. In Thirty-fifth conference on neural information processing systems datasets and benchmarks track (round 2), 2021.
  21. Alicia Curth and Mihaela van der Schaar. Nonparametric estimation of heterogeneous treatment effects: From theory to learning algorithms. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 1810-1818. PMLR, 2021.
  22. Sören R Künzel, Jasjeet S Sekhon, Peter J Bickel, and Bin Yu. Metalearners for estimating heteroge- neous treatment effects using machine learning. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 116 (10):4156-4165, 2019.
  23. Paul W Holland. Statistics and causal inference. Journal of the American statistical Association, 81 (396):945-960, 1986.
  24. Uri Shalit, Fredrik D Johansson, and David Sontag. Estimating individual treatment effect: general- ization bounds and algorithms. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 3076-3085. PMLR, 2017.
  25. Thomas S Richardson and James M Robins. Single world intervention graphs (swigs): A unification of the counterfactual and graphical approaches to causality. Center for the Statistics and the Social Sciences, University of Washington Series. Working Paper, 128(30):2013, 2013.
  26. Donald B Rubin. Comment: Neyman (1923) and causal inference in experiments and observational studies. Statistical Science, 5(4):472-480, 1990.
  27. Guido W Imbens and Donald B Rubin. Causal inference in statistics, social, and biomedical sciences. Cambridge University Press, 2015.
  28. Bryan Lim. Forecasting treatment responses over time using recurrent marginal structural networks. Advances in neural information processing systems, 31, 2018.
  29. Toon Vanderschueren, Alicia Curth, Wouter Verbeke, and Mihaela Van Der Schaar. Accounting for informative sampling when learning to forecast treatment outcomes over time. In Andreas Krause, Emma Brunskill, Kyunghyun Cho, Barbara Engelhardt, Sivan Sabato, and Jonathan Scar- lett, editors, Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 202 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 34855-34874. PMLR, 23-29 Jul 2023. URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v202/vanderschueren23a.html.
  30. Jeroen Berrevoets, James Jordon, Ioana Bica, Mihaela van der Schaar, et al. Organite: Optimal transplant donor organ offering using an individual treatment effect. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:20037-20050, 2020.
  31. Jinsung Yoon, James Jordon, and Mihaela Van Der Schaar. Ganite: Estimation of individualized treat- ment effects using generative adversarial nets. In International conference on learning representations, 2018.
  32. Toon Vanderschueren, Jeroen Berrevoets, and Wouter Verbeke. NOFLITE: Learning to predict individ- ual treatment effect distributions. Transactions on Machine Learning Research, 2023. ISSN 2835-8856. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=EjqopDxLbG.
  33. Ioana Bica, James Jordon, and Mihaela van der Schaar. Estimating the effects of continuous- valued interventions using generative adversarial networks. In H. Larochelle, M. Ran- zato, R. Hadsell, M.F. Balcan, and H. Lin, editors, Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems, volume 33, pages 16434-16445.
  34. Curran Associates, Inc., 2020. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper_files/paper/2020/file/bea5955b308361a1b07bc55042e25e54-Paper.p
  35. Jeroen Berrevoets, Ahmed Alaa, Zhaozhi Qian, James Jordon, Alexander ES Gimson, and Mihaela Van Der Schaar. Learning queueing policies for organ transplantation allocation using interpretable counterfactual survival analysis. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 792-802. PMLR, 2021.
  36. Johann Brehmer, Pim De Haan, Phillip Lippe, and Taco S Cohen. Weakly supervised causal repre- sentation learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:38319-38331, 2022.
  37. Pim De Haan, Dinesh Jayaraman, and Sergey Levine. Causal confusion in imitation learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 32, 2019.
  38. Phillip Lippe, Sara Magliacane, Sindy Löwe, Yuki M Asano, Taco Cohen, and Efstratios Gavves. Causal representation learning for instantaneous and temporal effects in interactive systems. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations, 2022.
  39. Chaochao Lu, José Miguel Hernández-Lobato, and Bernhard Schölkopf. Invariant causal representation learning for generalization in imitation and reinforcement learning. In ICLR2022 Workshop on the Elements of Reasoning: Objects, Structure and Causality, 2022.
  40. Kartik Ahuja, Divyat Mahajan, Yixin Wang, and Yoshua Bengio. Interventional causal representation learning. In International conference on machine learning, pages 372-407. PMLR, 2023.
  41. Aapo Hyvärinen. Independent component analysis: recent advances. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 371(1984):20110534, 2013.
  42. Aapo Hyvärinen and Erkki Oja. Independent component analysis: algorithms and applications. Neural networks, 13(4-5):411-430, 2000.
  43. Yao Zhang, Jeroen Berrevoets, and Mihaela Van Der Schaar. Identifiable energy-based representations: An application to estimating heterogeneous causal effects. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pages 4158-4177. PMLR, 2022.
  44. Aapo Hyvärinen and Petteri Pajunen. Nonlinear independent component analysis: Existence and uniqueness results. Neural networks, 12(3):429-439, 1999.
  45. Janine Witte, Leonard Henckel, Marloes H Maathuis, and Vanessa Didelez. On efficient adjustment in causal graphs. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 21(1):9956-10000, 2020.
  46. Kevin P Murphy. Machine learning: a probabilistic perspective. MIT press, 2012.
  47. Mateo Rojas-Carulla, Bernhard Schölkopf, Richard Turner, and Jonas Peters. Invariant models for causal transfer learning. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 19(1):1309-1342, 2018.
  48. Sara Magliacane, Thijs van Ommen, Tom Claassen, Stephan Bongers, Philip Versteeg, and Joris M Mooij. Causal transfer learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06422, 2017. · arXiv
  49. Pablo Morales-Alvarez, Angus Lamb, Simon Woodhead, Simon Peyton Jones, Miltiadis Allamanis, and Cheng Zhang. Vicause: Simultaneous missing value imputation and causal discovery with groups. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.08223, 2021. · arXiv
  50. Ron Kohavi et al. Scaling up the accuracy of naive-bayes classifiers: A decision-tree hybrid. In Kdd, volume 96, pages 202-207, 1996.
  51. Curran Associates, Inc., 2020. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2020/file/e05c7ba4e087beea9410929698dc41a6-Paper.pdf.
  52. Pat Langley, Wayne Iba, Kevin Thompson, et al. An analysis of bayesian classifiers. In Aaai, volume 90, pages 223-228, 1992.
  53. Ben Calderhead, Mark Girolami, and Neil Lawrence. Accelerating bayesian inference over nonlinear differential equations with gaussian processes. Advances in neural information processing systems, 21, 2008.
  54. Niklas Pfister, Stefan Bauer, and Jonas Peters. Identifying causal structure in large-scale kinetic systems. arXiv, pages 1810-11776, 2018.
  55. Sanghack Lee and Elias Bareinboim. Structural causal bandits: Where to intervene? In S. Bengio, H. Wallach, H. Larochelle, K. Grauman, N. Cesa-Bianchi, and R. Garnett, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 31.
  56. Curran Associates, Inc., 2018. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2018/file/c0a271bc0ecb776a094786474322cb82-Paper.pdf.
  57. Sanghack Lee and Elias Bareinboim. Characterizing optimal mixed policies: Where to intervene and what to observe. In H. Larochelle, M. Ranzato, R. Had- sell, M.F. Balcan, and H. Lin, editors, Advances in Neural Information Process- ing Systems, volume 33, pages 8565-8576.
  58. Curran Associates, Inc., 2020. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2020/file/61a10e6abb1149ad9d08f303267f9bc4-Paper.pdf.
  59. Chandrasekar Subramanian and Balaraman Ravindran. Causal contextual bandits with tar- geted interventions. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2022. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=F5Em8ASCosV.
  60. Curran Associates, Inc., 2021. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2021/file/d010396ca8abf6ead8cacc2c2f2f26c7-Paper.pdf.
  61. Yangyi Lu, Amirhossein Meisami, Ambuj Tewari, and William Yan. Regret analysis of ban- dit problems with causal background knowledge. In Jonas Peters and David Sontag, editors, Proceedings of the 36th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI), volume 124 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 141-150. PMLR, 03-06 Aug 2020. URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v124/lu20a.html.
  62. Virginia Aglietti, Xiaoyu Lu, Andrei Paleyes, and Javier González. Causal bayesian op- timization. In Silvia Chiappa and Roberto Calandra, editors, Proceedings of the Twenty Third International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, volume 108 of Pro- ceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 3155-3164. PMLR, 26-28 Aug 2020. URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v108/aglietti20a.html.
  63. Curran Associates, Inc., 2021. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2021/file/577bcc914f9e55d5e4e4f82f9f00e7d4-Paper.pdf.
  64. Nihal Sharma, Soumya Basu, Karthikeyan Shanmugam, and Sanjay Shakkottai. Warm starting bandits with side information from confounded data. arXiv preprint arXiv:2002.08405, 2020. · arXiv
  65. Curran Associates, Inc., 2021. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2021/file/b0b79da57b95837f14be95aaa4d54cf8-Paper.pdf.
  66. Junzhe Zhang. Designing optimal dynamic treatment regimes: A causal reinforcement learning ap- proach. In Hal Daumé III and Aarti Singh, editors, Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 119 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 11012-11022. PMLR, 13-18 Jul 2020. URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v119/zhang20a.html.
  67. Arquímides Méndez-Molina, Eduardo F.Morales, and L. Enrique Sucar. Causal discovery and reinforcement learning: A synergistic integration. In Antonio Salmerón and Rafael Rumi, edi- tors, Proceedings of The 11th International Conference on Probabilistic Graphical Models, volume 186 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 421-432. PMLR, 05-07 Oct 2022. URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v186/mendez-molina22a.html.
  68. Clare Lyle, Amy Zhang, Minqi Jiang, Joelle Pineau, and Yarin Gal. Resolving causal confusion in rein- forcement learning via robust exploration. In Self-Supervision for Reinforcement Learning Workshop- ICLR 2021, 2021.
  69. Curran Associates, Inc., 2021. URL https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2021/file/c1722a7941d61aad6e651a35b65a9c3e-Paper.pdf.
  70. Chao-Han Huck Yang, I Hung, Te Danny, Yi Ouyang, and Pin-Yu Chen. Causal inference q-network: Toward resilient reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.09677, 2021. · arXiv
  71. Yangyi Lu, Amirhossein Meisami, and Ambuj Tewari. Efficient reinforcement learning with prior causal knowledge. In Bernhard Schölkopf, Caroline Uhler, and Kun Zhang, editors, Proceedings of the First Conference on Causal Learning and Reasoning, volume 177 of Pro- ceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 526-541. PMLR, 11-13 Apr 2022. URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v177/lu22a.html.
  72. Mirco Mutti, Riccardo De Santi, Emanuele Rossi, Juan Felipe Calderon, Michael M. Bronstein, and Marcello Restelli. Provably efficient causal model-based reinforcement learning for environment- agnostic generalization. In A causal view on dynamical systems, NeurIPS 2022 workshop, 2022. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=VDunku3bDk.
  73. Tennison Liu, Zhaozhi Qian, Jeroen Berrevoets, and Mihaela van der Schaar. GOGGLE: Generative modelling for tabular data by learning relational structure. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=fPVRcJqspu.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Berrevoets, J., Kacprzyk, K., Qian, Z., & van der Schaar, M.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4323547446
Cited by
8
References
139
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
  • Microsoft Research
  • King's College London
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Keywords
causal inference, causal representation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review