In-context learning (ICL), a nonparametric learning method based on the knowledge of demonstration sets, has become a de facto standard for large language models (LLMs). The primary goal of ICL is to select valuable demonstration sets to enhance the performance of LLMs. Traditional ICL methods choose demonstration sets that share similar features with a given query. However, our experiments reveal that these traditional ICL approaches perform poorly on out-of-distribution (OOD) datasets, where the demonstration set and the query originate from different distributions. To ensure robust performance in OOD datasets, it is essential to learn causal representations that remain invariant between the source and target datasets. Inspired by causal representation learning, we propose causal-aware in-context learning (CCL). CCL captures the causal representations of a given dataset and selects demonstration sets that share similar causal features with the query. To achieve this, CCL employs a novel VAE-based causal representation learning technique. We demonstrate that CCL improves the OOD generalization performance of LLMs both theoretically and empirically.

Real-world datasets are often a combination of unobserved subpopulations that follow distinct causal generating processes. In an observational study, for example, participants may fall into unknown groups that either (a) respond effectively to a drug, or (b) show no response due to drug resistance. Not accounting for such heterogeneity then risks biased estimates of drug effectiveness. In this work, we formulate this setting through a causal mixture model, in which the data-generating process of each variable depends on latent group membership (a or b).

The goal of Root Cause Analysis (RCA) is to explain why an anomaly occurred by identifying where the fault originated. Several recent works model the anomalous event as resulting from a change in the causal mechanism at the root cause, i.e., as a soft intervention. RCA is then the task of identifying which causal mechanism changed. In real-world applications, one often has either few or only a single sample from the post-intervention distribution: a severe limitation for most methods, which assume one knows or can estimate the distribution. However, even those that do not are statistically ill-posed due to the need to probe regression models in regions of low probability density. In this paper, we propose simple, efficient methods to overcome both difficulties in the case where there is a single root cause and the causal graph is a polytree. When one knows the causal graph, we give guarantees for a traversal algorithm that requires only marginal anomaly scores and does not depend on specifying an arbitrary anomaly score cut-off. When one does not know the causal graph, we show that the heuristic of identifying root causes as the variables with the highest marginal anomaly scores is causally justified. To this end, we prove that anomalies with small scores are unlikely to cause those with larger scores in polytrees and give upper bounds for the likelihood of causal pathways with non-monotonic anomaly scores.

When building a world model, a common assumption is that the environment has a single, unchanging underlying causal rule, like applying Newton's laws to every situation. However, in truly open-ended environments, the apparent causal mechanism may drift over time because the agent continually encounters novel contexts and operates within a limited observational window. This brings about a problem that, when building a world model, even subtle shifts in policy or environment states can alter the very observed causal mechanisms. In this work, we introduce the Meta-Causal Graph as world models for open-ended environments, a minimal unified representation that efficiently encodes the transformation rules governing how causal structures shift across different latent world states. A single Meta-Causal Graph is composed of multiple causal subgraphs, each triggered by meta state, which is in the latent state space. Building on this representation, we introduce a Causality-Seeking Agent whose objectives are to (1) identify the meta states that trigger each subgraph, (2) discover the corresponding causal relationships by agent curiosity-driven intervention policy, and (3) iteratively refine the Meta-Causal Graph through ongoing curiosity-driven exploration and agent experiences. Experiments on both synthetic tasks and a challenging robot arm manipulation task demonstrate that our method robustly captures shifts in causal dynamics and generalizes effectively to previously unseen contexts.

Concept-based models are an emerging paradigm in deep learning that constrains the inference process to operate through human-interpretable variables, facilitating explainability and human interaction. However, these architectures, on par with popular opaque neural models, fail to account for the true causal mechanisms underlying the target phenomena represented in the data. This hampers their ability to support causal reasoning tasks, limits out-of-distribution generalization, and hinders the implementation of fairness constraints. To overcome these issues, we propose Causally reliable Concept Bottleneck Models (C$^2$BMs), a class of concept-based architectures that enforce reasoning through a bottleneck of concepts structured according to a model of the real-world causal mechanisms. We also introduce a pipeline to automatically learn this structure from observational data and unstructured background knowledge (e.g., scientific literature). Experimental evidence suggests that C$^2$BMs are more interpretable, causally reliable, and improve responsiveness to interventions w.r.t.

Neural network (NN)-based nonlinear causal discovery methods recover DAG structure but leave each causal mechanism as a black box. Waxman et al. argued that extracting causal mechanisms from NN weights is ill-posed. We propose EML-CD, a framework that integrates the EML operator (capable of composing elementary functions from a single binary operator) into causal structure learning, with interpretable mechanism recovery as the primary objective. EML-CD represents each edge mechanism as a gated EML binary tree and automatically discovers closed-form causal equations. Analytical Jacobians can be directly computed from the output equations, enabling quantitative understanding of causal effects. On real data (Sachs protein signaling, d=11), EML-CD achieves SHD=11.2 +/- 0.4 (5-seed mean; baselines are single deterministic runs), on par with PC/GES within seed variance and below CAM, while attaching closed-form equations to each detected edge (precision 0.756, recall 0.365). In a controlled bivariate test with known mechanisms, EML-CD recovers 10 of 11 elementary function families faithfully (held-out shape correlation >= 0.96; only high-frequency sine is partial). On a symbolic synthetic benchmark, EML-CD attains a substantially lower and more stable held-out mechanism f-MSE than a fixed SINDy dictionary (mean 3.67 vs. 7644, the latter inflated by catastrophic extrapolation on one seed), although its structure recovery (SHD 14.0) only matches the dictionary and stays below specialized optimizers; on the Causal Chambers light-tunnel subset, a depth-2 model improves F1 over linear OLS-BIC (0.444 vs. 0.273).

Causal discovery in time series is increasingly performed using nonlinear machine-learning models, yet the resulting causal relationships are almost always summarized by scalar edge scores. We argue that this practice obscures the true object learned by nonlinear autoregressive models: a state-dependent function whose effect varies across regimes, magnitudes, and contexts. We formalize function-valued causal influence for additive, contribution-decomposable architectures and show that scalar causal scores constitute a severe information bottleneck, conflating between-state variation with within-state residual noise. Using Neural Additive Vector Autoregression as a representative architecture, we introduce a practical framework based on Individual Conditional Expectation for estimating causal response functions directly from trained models. Through controlled synthetic experiments, we demonstrate that edges with indistinguishable scalar scores can exhibit qualitatively different functional behaviors, including monotonic, thresholded, saturating, and sign-changing effects. An applied case study on democratic development further shows that function-valued analysis reveals regime-specific and asymmetric causal structure systematically missed by score-centric approaches.

The Equalized Odds (for short, EO) is one of the most popular measures of discrimination used in the supervised learning setting. It ascertains fairness through the balance of the misclassification rates (false positive and negative) across the protected groups -- e.g., in the context of law enforcement, an African-American defendant who would not commit a future crime will have an equal opportunity of being released, compared to a non-recidivating Caucasian defendant. Despite this noble goal, it has been acknowledged in the literature that statistical tests based on the EO are oblivious to the underlying causal mechanisms that generated the disparity in the first place (Hardt et al. 2016). This leads to a critical disconnect between statistical measures readable from the data and the meaning of discrimination in the legal system, where compelling evidence that the observed disparity is tied to a specific causal process deemed unfair by society is required to characterize discrimination. The goal of this paper is to develop a principled approach to connect the statistical disparities characterized by the EO and the underlying, elusive, and frequently unobserved, causal mechanisms that generated such inequality. We start by introducing a new family of counterfactual measures that allows one to explain the misclassification disparities in terms of the underlying mechanisms in an arbitrary, non-parametric structural causal model. This will, in turn, allow legal and data analysts to interpret currently deployed classifiers through causal lens, linking the statistical disparities found in the data to the corresponding causal processes. Leveraging the new family of counterfactual measures, we develop a learning procedure to construct a classifier that is statistically efficient, interpretable, and compatible with the basic human intuition of fairness. We demonstrate our results through experiments in both real (COMPAS) and synthetic datasets.

The Equalized Odds (for short, EO) is one of the most popular measures of discrimination used in the supervised learning setting. It ascertains fairness through the balance of the misclassification rates (false positive and negative) across the protected groups - e.g., in the context of law enforcement, an African-American defendant who would not commit a future crime will have an equal opportunity of being released, compared to a non-recidivating Caucasian defendant. Despite this noble goal, it has been acknowledged in the literature that statistical tests based on the EO are oblivious to the underlying causal mechanisms that generated the disparity in the first place (Hardt et al. 2016). This leads to a critical disconnect between statistical measures readable from the data and the meaning of discrimination in the legal system, where compelling evidence that the observed disparity is tied to a specific causal process deemed unfair by society is required to characterize discrimination. The goal of this paper is to develop a principled approach to connect the statistical disparities characterized by the EO and the underlying, elusive, and frequently unobserved, causal mechanisms that generated such inequality. We start by introducing a new family of counterfactual measures that allows one to explain the misclassification disparities in terms of the underlying mechanisms in an arbitrary, non-parametric structural causal model. This will, in turn, allow legal and data analysts to interpret currently deployed classifiers through causal lens, linking the statistical disparities found in the data to the corresponding causal processes. Leveraging the new family of counterfactual measures, we develop a learning procedure to construct a classifier that is statistically efficient, interpretable, and compatible with the basic human intuition of fairness. We demonstrate our results through experiments in both real (COMPAS) and synthetic datasets.

Obtaining human-interpretable explanations of large, general-purpose language models is an urgent goal for AI safety.