Causal reasoning capability is critical in advancing large language models (LLMs) toward strong artificial intelligence. While versatile LLMs appear to have demonstrated capabilities in understanding contextual causality and providing responses that obey the laws of causality, it remains unclear whether they perform genuine causal reasoning akin to humans. However, current evidence indicates the contrary. Specifically, LLMs are only capable of performing shallow (level-1) causal reasoning, primarily attributed to the causal knowledge embedded in their parameters, but they lack the capacity for genuine human-like (level-2) causal reasoning. To support this hypothesis, methodologically, we delve into the autoregression mechanism of transformer-based LLMs, revealing that it is not inherently causal. Empirically, we introduce a new causal Q&A benchmark called CausalProbe-2024, whose corpora are fresh and nearly unseen for the studied LLMs. The LLMs exhibit a significant performance drop on CausalProbe-2024 compared to earlier benchmarks, indicating the fact that they primarily engage in level-1 causal reasoning. To bridge the gap towards level-2 causal reasoning, we draw inspiration from the fact that human reasoning is usually facilitated by general knowledge and intended goals. We propose G^2-Reasoner, a method that incorporates general knowledge and goal-oriented prompts into LLMs' causal reasoning processes. Experiments demonstrate that G^2-Reasoner significantly enhances LLMs' causal reasoning capability, particularly in fresh and counterfactual contexts. This work sheds light on a new path for LLMs to advance towards genuine causal reasoning, going beyond level-1 and making strides towards level-2.

Despite the impressive performance of vision-language models (VLMs) on downstream tasks, their ability to understand and reason about causal relationships in visual inputs remains unclear. Robust causal reasoning is fundamental to solving complex high-level reasoning tasks, yet existing benchmarks often include a mixture of reasoning questions, and VLMs can frequently exploit object recognition and activity identification as shortcuts to arrive at the correct answers, making it challenging to truly assess their causal reasoning abilities. To bridge this gap, we introduce VQA-Causal and VCR-Causal, two new benchmarks specifically designed to isolate and rigorously evaluate VLMs' causal reasoning abilities. Our findings reveal that while VLMs excel in object and activity recognition, they perform poorly on causal reasoning tasks, often only marginally surpassing random guessing. Further analysis suggests that this limitation stems from a severe lack of causal expressions in widely used training datasets, where causal relationships are rarely explicitly conveyed. We additionally explore fine-tuning strategies with hard negative cases, showing that targeted fine-tuning can improve model's causal reasoning while maintaining generalization and downstream performance. Our study highlights a key gap in current VLMs and lays the groundwork for future work on causal understanding.

Large language models (LLMs) have recently shown remarkable performance in language tasks and beyond. However, due to their limited inherent causal reasoning ability, LLMs still face challenges in handling tasks that require robust causal reasoning ability, such as healthcare and economical analysis. As a result, a growing body of research has focused on enhancing the causal reasoning ability of LLMs. Despite the booming research, there lacks of a survey to well review the challenges, progress and future directions in this area. To bridge this significant gap, we systematically review literature on how to strengthen LLMs' causal reasoning ability in this paper. We start from the introduction of background and motivations of this topic, followed by the summarization of key challenges in this area. Thereafter, we propose a novel taxonomy to systematically categorize existing methods, together with detailed comparisons within and between classes of methods. Furthermore, we summarize existing benchmarks and evaluation metrics for assessing LLMs' causal reasoning ability. Finally, we outline future research directions for this emerging field, offering insights and inspiration to researchers and practitioners in the area.

Causal reasoning, the ability to identify cause-and-effect relationship, is crucial in human thinking. Although large language models (LLMs) succeed in many NLP tasks, it is still challenging for them to conduct complex causal reasoning like abductive reasoning and counterfactual reasoning. Given the fact that programming code may express causal relations more often and explicitly with conditional statements like ``if``, we want to explore whether Code-LLMs acquire better causal reasoning abilities. Our experiments show that compared to text-only LLMs, Code-LLMs with code prompts are significantly better in causal reasoning. We further intervene on the prompts from different aspects, and discover that the programming structure is crucial in code prompt design, while Code-LLMs are robust towards format perturbations.