Causal effect estimation is critical to a range of scientific disciplines. Existing methods for this task either require interventional data, knowledge about the ground-truth causal graph, or rely on assumptions such as unconfoundedness, restricting their applicability in real-world settings. In the domain of tabular machine learning, Prior-data fitted networks (PFNs) have achieved state-of-theart predictive performance, having been pre-trained on synthetic causal data to solve tabular prediction problems via in-context learning. To assess whether this can be transferred to the problem of causal effect estimation, we pre-train PFNs on synthetic data drawn from a wide variety of causal structures, including interventions, to predict interventional outcomes given observational data. Through extensive experiments in synthetic and semi-synthetic settings, we show that our approach allows for the accurate estimation of causal effects without knowledge of the underlying causal graph.

We study the problem of estimating the average treatment effect (ATE) in adaptive experiments where treatment can only be encouraged--rather than directly assigned--via a binary instrumental variable. Building on semiparametric efficiency theory, we derive the efficiency bound for ATE estimation under arbitrary, history-dependent instrument-assignment policies, and show it is minimized by a variance-aware allocation rule that balances outcome noise and compliance variability. Leveraging this insight, we introduce AMRIV--an Adaptive, Multiply-Robust estimator for Instrumental-Variable settings with variance-optimal assignment. AMRIV pairs (i) an online policy that adaptively approximates the optimal allocation with (ii) a sequential, influence-function-based estimator that attains the semiparametric efficiency bound while retaining multiply-robust consistency. We establish asymptotic normality, explicit convergence rates, and anytime-valid asymptotic confidence sequences that enable sequential inference. Finally, we demonstrate the practical effectiveness of our approach through empirical studies, showing that adaptive instrument assignment, when combined with the AMRIV estimator, yields improved efficiency and robustness compared to existing baselines.

Unobserved confounding is a fundamental challenge for estimating causal effects. To address unobserved confounding, recent literature has turned to two different approaches -- proxy variables and the use of multiple treatments. The first approach, commonly referred to as proximal causal inference, requires proxies to be assigned to specific asymmetric roles: treatment-inducing proxies (negative control exposures), variables that act as common causes of the treatment and outcome, and outcome-inducing proxies (negative control outcomes). In practice, however, identifying variables that satisfy these asymmetric roles can be difficult depending on the application domain. The second approach, commonly referred to as the ``Deconfounder," deals with multiple conditionally independent treatments. There has been limited progress towards developing a consistent estimation method for this setting. As the primary contribution of this work, we establish that causal effects are identifiable in both settings when the unobserved confounder is categorical under suitable conditions. Our approach builds on a mixture learning perspective: we show that the underlying confounding structure can be recovered by identifying the corresponding mixture distribution. We propose an estimation procedure based on tensor decomposition, which allows consistent recovery of the latent structure and comes with non-asymptotic guarantees. Simulation studies and real data experiments demonstrate that the proposed method performs well even with limited data.

We develop a Bayesian tree ensemble model to estimate heterogeneous treatment effects in censored survival data with high-dimensional covariates. Instead of imposing sparsity through the tree structure, we place a horseshoe prior directly on the step heights to achieve adaptive global-local shrinkage. This strategy allows flexible regularisation and reduces noise. We develop a reversible jump Gibbs sampler to accommodate the non-conjugate horseshoe prior within the tree ensemble framework. We show through extensive simulations that the method accurately estimates treatment effects in high-dimensional covariate spaces, at various sparsity levels, and under non-linear treatment effect functions. We further illustrate the practical utility of the proposed approach by a re-analysis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) survival data from The Cancer Genome Atlas.

Predicting how different interventions will causally affect a specific individual is important in a variety of domains such as personalized medicine, public policy, and online marketing. There are a large number of methods to predict the effect of an existing intervention based on historical data from individuals who received it. However, in many settings it is important to predict the effects of novel interventions (e.g., a newly invented drug), which these methods do not address. Here, we consider zero-shot causal learning: predicting the personalized effects of a novel intervention. We propose CaML, a causal meta-learning framework which formulates the personalized prediction of each intervention's effect as a task. CaML trains a single meta-model across thousands of tasks, each constructed by sampling an intervention, its recipients, and its nonrecipients. By leveraging both intervention information (e.g., a drug's attributes) and individual features (e.g., a patient's history), CaML is able to predict the personalized effects of novel interventions that do not exist at the time of training. Experimental results on real world datasets in large-scale medical claims and cell-line perturbations demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach. Most strikingly, CaML's zero-shot predictions outperform even strong baselines trained directly on data from the test interventions.

We investigate the optimal design of experimental studies that have pre-treatment outcome data available. The average treatment effect is estimated as the difference between the weighted average outcomes of the treated and control units. A number of commonly used approaches fit this formulation, including the difference-inmeans estimator and a variety of synthetic-control techniques. We propose several methods for choosing the set of treated units in conjunction with the weights. Observing the NP-hardness of the problem, we introduce a mixed-integer programming formulation which selects both the treatment and control sets and unit weightings. We prove that these proposed approaches lead to qualitatively different experimental units being selected for treatment. We use simulations based on publicly available data from the USBureau of Labor Statistics that show improvements in terms of mean squared error and statistical power when compared to simple and commonly used alternatives such as randomized trials.