Causal Discovery using Bayesian Model Selection

With only observational data on two variables, and without other assumptions, it is not possible to infer which one causes the other. Much of the causal literature has focused on guaranteeing identifiability of causal direction in statistical models for datasets where strong assumptions hold, such as additive noise or restrictions on parameter count. These methods are then subsequently tested on realistic datasets, most of which violate their assumptions. Building on previous attempts, we show how to use causal assumptions within the Bayesian framework. This allows us to specify models with realistic assumptions, while also encoding independent causal mechanisms, leading to an asymmetry between the causal directions. Identifying causal direction then becomes a Bayesian model selection problem. We analyse why Bayesian model selection works for known identifiable cases and flexible model classes, while also providing correctness guarantees about its behaviour. To demonstrate our approach, we construct a Bayesian non-parametric model that can flexibly model the joint. We then outperform previous methods on a wide range of benchmark datasets with varying data generating assumptions showing the usefulness of our method.

Generalization bounds and algorithms for estimating conditional average treatment effect of dosage

We investigate the task of estimating the conditional average causal effect of treatment-dosage pairs from a combination of observational data and assumptions on the causal relationships in the underlying system. This has been a longstanding challenge for fields of study such as epidemiology or economics that require a treatment-dosage pair to make decisions but may not be able to run randomized trials to precisely quantify their effect and heterogeneity across individuals. In this paper, we extend (Shalit et al, 2017) to give new bounds on the counterfactual generalization error in the context of a continuous dosage parameter which relies on a different approach to defining counterfactuals and assignment bias adjustment. This result then guides the definition of new learning objectives that can be used to train representation learning algorithms for which we show empirically new state-of-the-art performance results across several benchmark datasets for this problem, including in comparison to doubly-robust estimation methods.

Integrating overlapping datasets using bivariate causal discovery

Causal knowledge is vital for effective reasoning in science, as causal relations, unlike correlations, allow one to reason about the outcomes of interventions. Algorithms that can discover causal relations from observational data are based on the assumption that all variables have been jointly measured in a single dataset. In many cases this assumption fails. Previous approaches to overcoming this shortcoming devised algorithms that returned all joint causal structures consistent with the conditional independence information contained in each individual dataset. But, as conditional independence tests only determine causal structure up to Markov equivalence, the number of consistent joint structures returned by these approaches can be quite large. The last decade has seen the development of elegant algorithms for discovering causal relations beyond conditional independence, which can distinguish among Markov equivalent structures. In this work we adapt and extend these so-called bivariate causal discovery algorithms to the problem of learning consistent causal structures from multiple datasets with overlapping variables belonging to the same generating process, providing a sound and complete algorithm that outperforms previous approaches on synthetic and real data.