While witnessing the exceptional success of machine learning (ML) technologies in many applications, users are starting to notice a critical shortcoming of ML: correlation is a poor substitute for causation. The conventional way to discover causal relationships is to use randomized controlled experiments (RCT); in many situations, however, these are impractical or sometimes unethical. Causal learning from observational data offers a promising alternative. While being relatively recent, causal learning aims to go far beyond conventional machine learning, yet several major challenges remain. Unfortunately, advances are hampered due to the lack of unified benchmark datasets, algorithms, metrics, and evaluation service interfaces for causal learning. In this paper, we introduce {\em CausalBench}, a transparent, fair, and easy-to-use evaluation platform, aiming to (a) enable the advancement of research in causal learning by facilitating scientific collaboration in novel algorithms, datasets, and metrics and (b) promote scientific objectivity, reproducibility, fairness, and awareness of bias in causal learning research. CausalBench provides services for benchmarking data, algorithms, models, and metrics, impacting the needs of a broad of scientific and engineering disciplines.

Causality reveals fundamental principles behind data distributions in real-world scenarios, and the capability of large language models (LLMs) to understand causality directly impacts their efficacy across explaining outputs, adapting to new evidence, and generating counterfactuals. With the proliferation of LLMs, the evaluation of this capacity is increasingly garnering attention. However, the absence of a comprehensive benchmark has rendered existing evaluation studies being straightforward, undiversified, and homogeneous. To address these challenges, this paper proposes a comprehensive benchmark, namely CausalBench, to evaluate the causality understanding capabilities of LLMs. Originating from the causal research community, CausalBench encompasses three causal learning-related tasks, which facilitate a convenient comparison of LLMs' performance with classic causal learning algorithms. Meanwhile, causal networks of varying scales and densities are integrated in CausalBench, to explore the upper limits of LLMs' capabilities across task scenarios of varying difficulty. Notably, background knowledge and structured data are also incorporated into CausalBench to thoroughly unlock the underlying potential of LLMs for long-text comprehension and prior information utilization. Based on CausalBench, this paper evaluates nineteen leading LLMs and unveils insightful conclusions in diverse aspects. Firstly, we present the strengths and weaknesses of LLMs and quantitatively explore the upper limits of their capabilities across various scenarios. Meanwhile, we further discern the adaptability and abilities of LLMs to specific structural networks and complex chain of thought structures. Moreover, this paper quantitatively presents the differences across diverse information sources and uncovers the gap between LLMs' capabilities in causal understanding within textual contexts and numerical domains.

Causal inference is a vital aspect of multiple scientific disciplines and is routinely applied to high-impact applications such as medicine. However, evaluating the performance of causal inference methods in real-world environments is challenging due to the need for observations under both interventional and control conditions. Traditional evaluations conducted on synthetic datasets do not reflect the performance in real-world systems. To address this, we introduce CausalBench, a benchmark suite for evaluating network inference methods on real-world interventional data from large-scale single-cell perturbation experiments. CausalBench incorporates biologically-motivated performance metrics, including new distribution-based interventional metrics. A systematic evaluation of state-of-the-art causal inference methods using our CausalBench suite highlights how poor scalability of current methods limits performance. Moreover, methods that use interventional information do not outperform those that only use observational data, contrary to what is observed on synthetic benchmarks. Thus, CausalBench opens new avenues in causal network inference research and provides a principled and reliable way to track progress in leveraging real-world interventional data.