Understanding causal relationships between variables is a fundamental problem with broad impact in numerous scientific fields. While extensive research has been dedicated to learning causal graphs from data, its complementary concept of testing causal relationships has remained largely unexplored. While learning involves the task of recovering the Markov equivalence class (MEC) of the underlying causal graph from observational data, the testing counterpart addresses the following critical question: Given a specific MEC and observational data from some causal graph, can we determine if the data-generating causal graph belongs to the given MEC? We explore constraint-based testing methods by establishing bounds on the required number of conditional independence tests. Our bounds are in terms of the size of the maximum undirected clique ($s$) of the given MEC. In the worst case, we show a lower bound of $\exp(\Omega(s))$ independence tests. We then give an algorithm that resolves the task with $\exp(O(s))$ tests, matching our lower bound. Compared to the learning problem, where algorithms often use a number of independence tests that is exponential in the maximum in-degree, this shows that testing is relatively easier. In particular, it requires exponentially less independence tests in graphs featuring high in-degrees and small clique sizes. Additionally, using the DAG associahedron, we provide a geometric interpretation of testing versus learning and discuss how our testing result can aid learning.
Causal graph discovery is a significant problem with applications across various disciplines. However, with observational data alone, the underlying causal graph can only be recovered up to its Markov equivalence class, and further assumptions or interventions are necessary to narrow down the true graph. This work addresses the causal discovery problem under the setting of stochastic interventions with the natural goal of minimizing the number of interventions performed. We propose the following stochastic intervention model which subsumes existing adaptive noiseless interventions in the literature while capturing scenarios such as fat-hand interventions and CRISPR gene knockouts: any intervention attempt results in an actual intervention on a random subset of vertices, drawn from a distribution dependent on attempted action. Under this model, we study the two fundamental problems in causal discovery of verification and search and provide approximation algorithms with polylogarithmic competitive ratios and provide some preliminary experimental results.
We examine the extent to which sublinear-sample property testing and estimation applies to settings where samples are independently but not identically distributed. Specifically, we consider the following distributional property testing framework: Suppose there is a set of distributions over a discrete support of size $k$, $\textbf{p}_1, \textbf{p}_2,\ldots,\textbf{p}_T$, and we obtain $c$ independent draws from each distribution. Suppose the goal is to learn or test a property of the average distribution, $\textbf{p}_{\mathrm{avg}}$. This setup models a number of important practical settings where the individual distributions correspond to heterogeneous entities -- either individuals, chronologically distinct time periods, spatially separated data sources, etc. From a learning standpoint, even with $c=1$ samples from each distribution, $\Theta(k/\varepsilon^2)$ samples are necessary and sufficient to learn $\textbf{p}_{\mathrm{avg}}$ to within error $\varepsilon$ in TV distance. To test uniformity or identity -- distinguishing the case that $\textbf{p}_{\mathrm{avg}}$ is equal to some reference distribution, versus has $\ell_1$ distance at least $\varepsilon$ from the reference distribution, we show that a linear number of samples in $k$ is necessary given $c=1$ samples from each distribution. In contrast, for $c \ge 2$, we recover the usual sublinear sample testing of the i.i.d. setting: we show that $O(\sqrt{k}/\varepsilon^2 + 1/\varepsilon^4)$ samples are sufficient, matching the optimal sample complexity in the i.i.d. case in the regime where $\varepsilon \ge k^{-1/4}$. Additionally, we show that in the $c=2$ case, there is a constant $\rho > 0$ such that even in the linear regime with $\rho k$ samples, no tester that considers the multiset of samples (ignoring which samples were drawn from the same $\textbf{p}_i$) can perform uniformity testing.
Learning causal structures from interventional data is a fundamental problem with broad applications across various fields. While many previous works have focused on recovering the entire causal graph, in practice, there are scenarios where learning only part of the causal graph suffices. This is called $targeted$ causal discovery. In our work, we focus on two such well-motivated problems: subset search and causal matching. We aim to minimize the number of interventions in both cases. Towards this, we introduce the $Meek~separator$, which is a subset of vertices that, when intervened, decomposes the remaining unoriented edges into smaller connected components. We then present an efficient algorithm to find Meek separators that are of small sizes. Such a procedure is helpful in designing various divide-and-conquer-based approaches. In particular, we propose two randomized algorithms that achieve logarithmic approximation for subset search and causal matching, respectively. Our results provide the first known average-case provable guarantees for both problems. We believe that this opens up possibilities to design near-optimal methods for many other targeted causal structure learning problems arising from various applications.
We develop a general framework for finding approximately-optimal preconditioners for solving linear systems. Leveraging this framework we obtain improved runtimes for fundamental preconditioning and linear system solving problems including the following. We give an algorithm which, given positive definite $\mathbf{K} \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times d}$ with $\mathrm{nnz}(\mathbf{K})$ nonzero entries, computes an $\epsilon$-optimal diagonal preconditioner in time $\widetilde{O}(\mathrm{nnz}(\mathbf{K}) \cdot \mathrm{poly}(\kappa^\star,\epsilon^{-1}))$, where $\kappa^\star$ is the optimal condition number of the rescaled matrix. We give an algorithm which, given $\mathbf{M} \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times d}$ that is either the pseudoinverse of a graph Laplacian matrix or a constant spectral approximation of one, solves linear systems in $\mathbf{M}$ in $\widetilde{O}(d^2)$ time. Our diagonal preconditioning results improve state-of-the-art runtimes of $\Omega(d^{3.5})$ attained by general-purpose semidefinite programming, and our solvers improve state-of-the-art runtimes of $\Omega(d^{\omega})$ where $\omega > 2.3$ is the current matrix multiplication constant. We attain our results via new algorithms for a class of semidefinite programs (SDPs) we call matrix-dictionary approximation SDPs, which we leverage to solve an associated problem we call matrix-dictionary recovery.
Causal discovery from interventional data is an important problem, where the task is to design an interventional strategy that learns the hidden ground truth causal graph $G(V,E)$ on $|V| = n$ nodes while minimizing the number of performed interventions. Most prior interventional strategies broadly fall into two categories: non-adaptive and adaptive. Non-adaptive strategies decide on a single fixed set of interventions to be performed while adaptive strategies can decide on which nodes to intervene on sequentially based on past interventions. While adaptive algorithms may use exponentially fewer interventions than their non-adaptive counterparts, there are practical concerns that constrain the amount of adaptivity allowed. Motivated by this trade-off, we study the problem of $r$-adaptivity, where the algorithm designer recovers the causal graph under a total of $r$ sequential rounds whilst trying to minimize the total number of interventions. For this problem, we provide a $r$-adaptive algorithm that achieves $O(\min\{r,\log n\} \cdot n^{1/\min\{r,\log n\}})$ approximation with respect to the verification number, a well-known lower bound for adaptive algorithms. Furthermore, for every $r$, we show that our approximation is tight. Our definition of $r$-adaptivity interpolates nicely between the non-adaptive ($r=1$) and fully adaptive ($r=n$) settings where our approximation simplifies to $O(n)$ and $O(\log n)$ respectively, matching the best-known approximation guarantees for both extremes. Our results also extend naturally to the bounded size interventions.
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.
Learning causal relationships between variables is a fundamental task in causal inference and directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) are a popular choice to represent the causal relationships. As one can recover a causal graph only up to its Markov equivalence class from observations, interventions are often used for the recovery task. Interventions are costly in general and it is important to design algorithms that minimize the number of interventions performed. In this work, we study the problem of learning the causal relationships of a subset of edges (target edges) in a graph with as few interventions as possible. Under the assumptions of faithfulness, causal sufficiency, and ideal interventions, we study this problem in two settings: when the underlying ground truth causal graph is known (subset verification) and when it is unknown (subset search). For the subset verification problem, we provide an efficient algorithm to compute a minimum sized interventional set; we further extend these results to bounded size non-atomic interventions and node-dependent interventional costs. For the subset search problem, in the worst case, we show that no algorithm (even with adaptivity or randomization) can achieve an approximation ratio that is asymptotically better than the vertex cover of the target edges when compared with the subset verification number. This result is surprising as there exists a logarithmic approximation algorithm for the search problem when we wish to recover the whole causal graph. To obtain our results, we prove several interesting structural properties of interventional causal graphs that we believe have applications beyond the subset verification/search problems studied here.
We provide an efficient unified plug-in approach for estimating symmetric properties of distributions given $n$ independent samples. Our estimator is based on profile-maximum-likelihood (PML) and is sample optimal for estimating various symmetric properties when the estimation error $\epsilon \gg n^{-1/3}$. This result improves upon the previous best accuracy threshold of $\epsilon \gg n^{-1/4}$ achievable by polynomial time computable PML-based universal estimators [ACSS21, ACSS20]. Our estimator reaches a theoretical limit for universal symmetric property estimation as [Han21] shows that a broad class of universal estimators (containing many well known approaches including ours) cannot be sample optimal for every $1$-Lipschitz property when $\epsilon \ll n^{-1/3}$.
We study two problems related to recovering causal graphs from interventional data: (i) $\textit{verification}$, where the task is to check if a purported causal graph is correct, and (ii) $\textit{search}$, where the task is to recover the correct causal graph. For both, we wish to minimize the number of interventions performed. For the first problem, we give a characterization of a minimal sized set of atomic interventions that is necessary and sufficient to check the correctness of a claimed causal graph. Our characterization uses the notion of $\textit{covered edges}$, which enables us to obtain simple proofs and also easily reason about earlier results. We also generalize our results to the settings of bounded size interventions and node-dependent interventional costs. For all the above settings, we provide the first known provable algorithms for efficiently computing (near)-optimal verifying sets on general graphs. For the second problem, we give a simple adaptive algorithm based on graph separators that produces an atomic intervention set which fully orients any essential graph while using $\mathcal{O}(\log n)$ times the optimal number of interventions needed to $\textit{verify}$ (verifying size) the underlying DAG on $n$ vertices. This approximation is tight as $\textit{any}$ search algorithm on an essential line graph has worst case approximation ratio of $\Omega(\log n)$ with respect to the verifying size. With bounded size interventions, each of size $\leq k$, our algorithm gives an $\mathcal{O}(\log n \cdot \log \log k)$ factor approximation. Our result is the first known algorithm that gives a non-trivial approximation guarantee to the verifying size on general unweighted graphs and with bounded size interventions.