Identifying latent variables and the causal structure involving them is essential across various scientific fields. While many existing works fall under the category of constraint-based methods (with e.g. conditional independence or rank deficiency tests), they may face empirical challenges such as testing-order dependency, error propagation, and choosing an appropriate significance level. These issues can potentially be mitigated by properly designed score-based methods, such as Greedy Equivalence Search (GES) (Chickering, 2002) in the specific setting without latent variables. Yet, formulating score-based methods with latent variables is highly challenging. In this work, we develop score-based methods that are capable of identifying causal structures containing causally-related latent variables with identifiability guarantees. Specifically, we show that a properly formulated scoring function can achieve score equivalence and consistency for structure learning of latent variable causal models. We further provide a characterization of the degrees of freedom for the marginal over the observed variables under multiple structural assumptions considered in the literature, and accordingly develop both exact and continuous score-based methods. This offers a unified view of several existing constraint-based methods with different structural assumptions. Experimental results validate the effectiveness of the proposed methods.

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.

Recent work on causal abstraction, in particular graphical approaches focusing on causal structure between clusters of variables, aims to summarize a high-dimensional causal structure in terms of a low-dimensional one. Existing methods for learning such summaries from data assume that both the high- and low-dimensional structures are acyclic, which is helpful for causal effect identification and reasoning but excludes many high-dimensional models and thus limits applicability. We show that in the linear non-Gaussian (LiNG) setting, the high-dimensional acyclicity assumption can be relaxed while still allowing recovery of a low-dimensional causal directed acyclic graph (DAG). We further connect identifiability of this low-dimensional DAG to existing results: LiNG models with cycles are observationally identifiable only up to an equivalence class whose members differ by reversals of directed cycles; our low-dimensional DAG, which is invariant across all members of a given equivalence class, thus forms a natural representative of the class. While existing approaches for learning this observational equivalence class over high-dimensional variables have exponential time complexity, our low-dimensional summary is learned in worst-case cubic time and comes with explicit bounds on the sample complexity. We provide open source code and experiments on synthetic data to corroborate our theoretical results.

Symbol Description Vt Set of observable variables at time t V0:TUnion of observable variables at time t= 0,...,T Xt Manipulative variables at time t Yt Target variable at time t P(Xt) Power set of Xt Mt Set of MIS sets at time t Xs,ts-th intervention set at time t In this section we give the proof for Theorem 1 in the main text. This means that W includes those variables that are parents of Yt but are nor target at previous time steps nor intervened variables. In the following proof the values of IV0:t 1, XPYs,t, IPY0:t 1 and W are denoted by i, xPY, iPY and w respectively. Finally, fYY and fNYYare the functions in the SCM for Yt (see Assumptions (1) in the main text). Eq. (2) follows from the Eq. Finally, noticing that p(yPTt |I0:t 1) is the distribution targeted when optimizing the objective function at previous time steps one can obtain Eq. (6). The derivations above show how the objective function at time t is given by the expected value of the output of the functional relationship fNYYwhere the expectation is taken with respect to the variables that are not intervened on. This expectation is then shifted to account for the interventions implemented in the system at previous time steps that are affecting the target variable through fYY .

This paper presents a topological learning-theoretic perspective on causal inference by introducing a series of topologies defined on general spaces of structural causal models (SCMs). As an illustration of the framework we prove a topological causal hierarchy theorem, showing that substantive assumption-free causal inference is possible only in a meager set of SCMs. Thanks to a known correspondence between open sets in the weak topology and statistically verifiable hypotheses, our results show that inductive assumptions sufficient to license valid causal inferences are statistically unverifiable in principle. Similar to no-free-lunch theorems for statistical inference, the present results clarify the inevitability of substantial assumptions for causal inference. An additional benefit of our topological approach is that it easily accommodates SCMs with infinitely many variables. We finally suggest that the framework may be helpful for the positive project of exploring and assessing alternative causal-inductive assumptions.

As autonomous systems rapidly become ubiquitous, there is a growing need for a legal and regulatory framework that addresses when and how such a system harms someone. There have been several attempts within the philosophy literature to define harm, but none of them has proven capable of dealing with the many examples that have been presented, leading some to suggest that the notion of harm should be abandoned and "replaced by more well-behaved notions". As harm is generally something that is caused, most of these definitions have involved causality at some level. Yet surprisingly, none of them makes use of causal models and the definitions of actual causality that they can express. In this paper we formally define a qualitative notion of harm that uses causal models and is based on a well-known definition of actual causality [13]. The key features of our definition are that it is based on contrastive causation and uses a default utility to which the utility of actual outcomes is compared. We show that our definition is able to handle the examples from the literature, and illustrate its importance for reasoning about situations involving autonomous systems.