Causal discovery, the problem of inferring the direction of causality, is generally ill-posed. We use the language of structural causal models (SCM) to show that assuming that the causal relations are acyclic and invariant across multiple environments (e.g., the way minimum wage affects employment rate is stable across different geographical regions), \textit{only} two auxiliary environments are sufficient to infer the causal graph for arbitrary nonlinear mechanisms. Moreover, we demonstrate that this implies identifiability of the SCM functional mechanisms: as a corollary, we show that \textit{two} auxiliary environments are sufficient to guarantee correct counterfactual inference. We empirically support our theoretical results on synthetic data.

In 2011, Judea Pearl received the Turing Award, considered the Nobel Prize in Computing, for fundamental contributions to artificial intelligence through the development of a calculus for probabilistic and causal reasoning. It includes pioneering the development of causal discovery algorithms. These computer algorithms can analyze large multivariate datasets and automatically discover the causal relationships among the constituent variables. They have been widely used in many critical fields such as medicine and economics to support decisions. However, to our knowledge, they have not been leveraged in law. This paper attempts to alleviate this gap by investigating whether causal discovery algorithms can be leveraged for automated generation of legal arguments. To that end, a novel legal dataset is prepared by identifying 17 legal concepts, such as physical assault and property dispute. A curated collection of 150 homicide cases are annotated with these concepts, e.g., a case is annotated with physical assault only if a physical assault had been reported in that case. Subsequently, a selected set of widely-used causal discovery algorithms is applied to the annotated dataset to discover the causal relationships between the legal concepts. Additionally, the degrees of belief associated with the discovered relationships are quantified in mathematical probabilities. It is shown that some of the causal relationships help generate viable legal arguments, e.g., if one could establish that a physical assault has not taken place during a homicide, it should be a sufficient condition (with probability 1) to establish that the homicide has not been committed due to a property-related dispute. Thus, this paper shows that causal discovery algorithms can be helpful in generating legal arguments, opening up avenues for promising future endeavors.

Incorporating causality into reinforcement learning methods increases the interpretability of artificial636 intelligence, which helps humans understand the underlying mechanism of algorithms and check637 the source of failures. However, the learned causal transition model may contain human-readable638 private information about the environment, which could raise privacy issues. To mitigate this potential639 negative societal impact, the causal transition model needs to be encrypted and only accessible to640 algorithms and trustworthy users.641 In this section, besides the most related formulation, robust RL introduced in Sec 3.3, we also643 introduce some other related RL problem formulations partially shown in Figure 3. Then, we limit644 our discussion to mainly two lines of work that are related to ours: (1) promoting robustness in RL;645 (2) concerning the spurious correlation issues in RL.646 B.1 Related RL formulations647 Robustness to noisy state: POMDPs and SA-MDPs.

A unifying theme in the design of intelligent agents is to efficiently optimize a policy based on what prior knowledge of the problem is available and what actions can be taken to learn more about it. Bandits are a canonical instance of this task that has been intensely studied in the literature. Most methods, however, typically rely solely on an agent's experimentation in a single environment (or multiple closely related environments). In this paper, we relax this assumption and consider the design of bandit algorithms from a combination of batch data and qualitative assumptions about the relatedness across different environments, represented in the form of causal models. In particular, we show that it is possible to exploit invariances across environments, wherever they may occur in the underlying causal model, to consistently improve learning. The resulting bandit algorithm has a sub-linear regret bound with an explicit dependency on a term that captures how informative related environments are for the task at hand; and may have substantially lower regret than experimentation-only bandit instances.