Learning the unknown causal parameters of a linear structural causal model is a fundamental task in causal analysis. The task, known as the problem of identification, asks to estimate the parameters of the model from a combination of assumptions on the graphical structure of the model and observational data, represented as a non-causal covariance matrix. In this paper, we give a new sound and complete algorithm for generic identification which runs in polynomial space. By a standard simulation result, namely PSPACE EXP, this algorithm has exponential running time which vastly improves the state-of-the-art double exponential time method using a Gröbner basis approach. The paper also presents evidence that parameter identification is computationally hard in general. In particular, we prove, that the task asking whether, for a given feasible correlation matrix, there are exactly one or two or more parameter sets explaining the observed matrix, is hard for R, the co-class of the existential theory of the reals. In particular, this problem is coNP-hard. To our best knowledge, this is the first hardness result for some notion of identifiability.

Decision trees are popular machine learning models that are simple to build and easy to interpret. Even though algorithms to learn decision trees date back to almost 50 years, key properties affecting their generalization error are still weakly bounded. Hence, we revisit binary decision trees on real-valued features from the perspective of partitions of the data. We introduce the notion of partitioning function, and we relate it to the growth function and to the VC dimension.

Learning Theory" book (section 4.11), provides examples of parametrized function classes where the VC

We consider the task of learning how to act in collaboration with a human expert based on observational data. The task is motivated by high-stake scenarios such as healthcare and welfare, where algorithmic action recommendations are made to a human expert, opening the option of deferring recommendation in cases where the human might act better on their own. This task is especially challenging when dealing with observational data, as using such data runs the risk of hidden confounders whose existence can lead to biased and harmful policies. However, unlike standard policy learning, the presence of a human expert can mitigate some of these risks. We build on the work of Mozannar and Sontag [2020] on consistent surrogate loss for learning with the option of deferral to an expert, where they solve a cost-sensitive supervised classification problem. Since we are solving a causal problem, where labels do not exist, we use a causal model to learn costs which are robust to a bounded degree of hidden confounding. We prove that our approach can take advantage of the strengths of both the model and the expert to obtain a better policy than either. We demonstrate our results by conducting experiments on synthetic and semi-synthetic data and show the advantages of our method compared to baselines.

In recent years, Wasserstein Distributionally Robust Optimization (DRO) has garnered substantial interest for its efficacy in data-driven decision-making under distributional uncertainty. However, limited research has explored the application of DRO to address individual fairness concerns, particularly when considering causal structures and sensitive attributes in learning problems. To address this gap, we first formulate the DRO problem from causality and individual fairness perspectives. We then present the DRO dual formulation as an efficient tool to convert the DRO problem into a more tractable and computationally efficient form. Next, we characterize the closed form of the approximate worst-case loss quantity as a regularizer, eliminating the max-step in the min-max DRO problem. We further estimate the regularizer in more general cases and explore the relationship between DRO and classical robust optimization. Finally, by removing the assumption of a known structural causal model, we provide finite sample error bounds when designing DRO with empirical distributions and estimated causal structures to ensure efficiency and robust learning.

We consider the linear causal representation learning setting where we observe a linear mixing of d unknown latent factors, which follow a linear structural causal model. Recent work has shown that it is possible to recover the latent factors as well as the underlying structural causal model over them, up to permutation and scaling, provided that we have at least d environments, each of which corresponds to perfect interventions on a single latent node (factor). After this powerful result, a key open problem faced by the community has been to relax these conditions: allow for coarser than perfect single-node interventions, and allow for fewer than d of them, since the number of latent factors d could be very large. In this work, we consider precisely such a setting, where we allow a smaller than d number of environments, and also allow for very coarse interventions that can very coarsely change the entire causal graph over the latent factors. On the flip side, we relax what we wish to extract to simply the list of nodes that have shifted between one or more environments. We provide a surprising identifiability result that it is indeed possible, under some very mild standard assumptions, to identify the set of shifted nodes. Our identifiability proof moreover is a constructive one: we explicitly provide necessary and sufficient conditions for a node to be a shifted node, and show that we can check these conditions given observed data. Our algorithm lends itself very naturally to the sample setting where instead of just interventional distributions, we are provided datasets of samples from each of these distributions. We corroborate our results on both synthetic experiments as well as an interesting psychometric dataset.

If causal relationships are linear and acyclic and noise terms are independent and Gaussian, causal orientation is not identified from observational data -- even if faithfulness is satisfied (Spirtes et al., 2002). Shimizu et al. (2006) showed that acyclic, linear, non-Gaussian (LiNGAM) causal models are identified from observational data, so long as no latent confounders are present. That holds even when faithfulness fails. Genin and Mayo-Wilson (2020) refine that result: not only are causal relationships identified, but causal orientation is statistically decidable. That means that for every ϵ > 0, there is a method that converges in probability to the correct orientation and, at every sample size, outputs an incorrect orientation with probability less than ϵ. These results naturally raise questions about what happens in the presence of latent confounders. Hoyer et al. (2008) and Salehkaleybar et al. (2020) show that, although the causal model is not uniquely identified, causal orientation among observed variables is identified in the presence of latent confounders, so long as faithfulness is satisfied. This paper refines these results: although it is possible to converge to the right orientation in the limit, causal orientation is no longer statistically decidable--it is not possible to converge to the correct orientation with finite-sample bounds on the probability of orientation errors, even if faithfulness is satisfied. However, that limiting result suggests several adjustments to the LiNGAM model that may recover decidability.

Linear causal models are important tools for modeling causal dependencies and yet in practice, only a subset of the variables can be observed. In this paper, we examine the parameter identifiability of these models by investigating whether the edge coefficients can be recovered given the causal structure and partially observed data. Our setting is more general than that of prior research--we allow all variables, including both observed and latent ones, to be flexibly related, and we consider the coefficients of all edges, whereas most existing works focus only on the edges between observed variables. Theoretically, we identify three types of indeterminacy for the parameters in partially observed linear causal models. We then provide graphical conditions that are sufficient for all parameters to be identifiable and show that some of them are provably necessary. Methodologically, we propose a novel likelihoodbased parameter estimation method that addresses the variance indeterminacy in a specific way and can asymptotically recover the underlying parameters up to trivial indeterminacy. Empirical studies on both synthetic and real-world datasets validate our identifiability theory and the effectiveness of the proposed method in the finitesample regime.

Causal discovery from observational data, especially for count data, is essential across scientific and industrial contexts, such as biology, economics, and network operation maintenance.