Understanding the predictions made by deep learning models remains a central challenge, especially in high-stakes applications. A promising approach is to equip models with the ability to answer counterfactual questions -- hypothetical ``what if?'' scenarios that go beyond the observed data and provide insight into a model reasoning. In this work, we introduce the notion of causal interpretability, which formalizes when counterfactual queries can be evaluated from a specific class of models and observational data. We analyze two common model classes -- blackbox and concept-based predictors -- and show that neither is causally interpretable in general. To address this gap, we develop a framework for building models that are causally interpretable by design. Specifically, we derive a complete graphical criterion that determines whether a given model architecture supports a given counterfactual query. This leads to a fundamental tradeoff between causal interpretability and predictive accuracy, which we characterize by identifying the unique maximal set of features that yields an interpretable model with maximal predictive expressiveness. Experiments corroborate the theoretical findings.

While large language models (LLMs) have advanced procedural planning for embodied AI systems through strong reasoning abilities, the integration of multimodal inputs and counterfactual reasoning remains underexplored. To tackle these challenges, we introduce LLaPa, a vision-language model framework designed for multimodal procedural planning. LLaPa generates executable action sequences from textual task descriptions and visual environmental images using vision-language models (VLMs). Furthermore, we enhance LLaPa with two auxiliary modules to improve procedural planning. The first module, the Task-Environment Reranker (TER), leverages task-oriented segmentation to create a task-sensitive feature space, aligning textual descriptions with visual environments and emphasizing critical regions for procedural execution. The second module, the Counterfactual Activities Retriever (CAR), identifies and emphasizes potential counterfactual conditions, enhancing the model's reasoning capability in counterfactual scenarios. Extensive experiments on ActPlan-1K and ALFRED benchmarks demonstrate that LLaPa generates higher-quality plans with superior LCS and correctness, outperforming advanced models. The code and models are available https://github.com/sunshibo1234/LLaPa.

Active Learning (AL) allows models to learn interactively from user feedback. This paper introduces a counterfactual data augmentation approach to AL, particularly addressing the selection of datapoints for user querying, a pivotal concern in enhancing data efficiency. Our approach is inspired by Variation Theory, a theory of human concept learning that emphasizes the essential features of a concept by focusing on what stays the same and what changes. Instead of just querying with existing datapoints, our approach synthesizes artificial datapoints that highlight potential key similarities and differences among labels using a neuro-symbolic pipeline combining large language models (LLMs) and rule-based models. Through an experiment in the example domain of text classification, we show that our approach achieves significantly higher performance when there are fewer annotated data. As the annotated training data gets larger the impact of the generated data starts to diminish showing its capability to address the cold start problem in AL. This research sheds light on integrating theories of human learning into the optimization of AL.

The impressive performance of recent language models across a wide range of tasks suggests that they possess a degree of abstract reasoning skills. Are these skills general and transferable, or specialized to specific tasks seen during pretraining? To disentangle these effects, we propose an evaluation framework based on "counterfactual" task variants that deviate from the default assumptions underlying standard tasks. Across a suite of 11 tasks, we observe nontrivial performance on the counterfactual variants, but nevertheless find that performance substantially and consistently degrades compared to the default conditions. This suggests that while current LMs may possess abstract task-solving skills to a degree, they often also rely on narrow, non-transferable procedures for task-solving. These results motivate a more careful interpretation of language model performance that teases apart these aspects of behavior.

Creating what-if stories requires reasoning about prior statements and possible outcomes of the changed conditions. One can easily generate coherent endings under new conditions, but it would be challenging for current systems to do it with minimal changes to the original story. Therefore, one major challenge is the trade-off between generating a logical story and rewriting with minimal-edits. In this paper, we propose EDUCAT, an editing-based unsupervised approach for counterfactual story rewriting. EDUCAT includes a target position detection strategy based on estimating causal effects of the what-if conditions, which keeps the causal invariant parts of the story. EDUCAT then generates the stories under fluency, coherence and minimal-edits constraints. We also propose a new metric to alleviate the shortcomings of current automatic metrics and better evaluate the trade-off. We evaluate EDUCAT on a public counterfactual story rewriting benchmark. Experiments show that EDUCAT achieves the best trade-off over unsupervised SOTA methods according to both automatic and human evaluation. The resources of EDUCAT are available at: https://github.com/jiangjiechen/EDUCAT.

The advances in artificial intelligence enabled by deep learning architectures are undeniable. In several cases, deep neural network driven models have surpassed human level performance in benchmark autonomy tasks. The underlying policies for these agents, however, are not easily interpretable. In fact, given their underlying deep models, it is impossible to directly understand the mapping from observations to actions for any reasonably complex agent. Producing this supporting technology to "open the black box" of these AI systems, while not sacrificing performance, was the fundamental goal of the DARPA XAI program. In our journey through this program, we have several "big picture" takeaways: 1) Explanations need to be highly tailored to their scenario; 2) many seemingly high performing RL agents are extremely brittle and are not amendable to explanation; 3) causal models allow for rich explanations, but how to present them isn't always straightforward; and 4) human subjects conjure fantastically wrong mental models for AIs, and these models are often hard to break. This paper discusses the origins of these takeaways, provides amplifying information, and suggestions for future work.

Recent text generation models are easy to generate relevant and fluent text for the given text, while lack of causal reasoning ability when we change some parts of the given text. Counterfactual story rewriting is a recently proposed task to test the causal reasoning ability for text generation models, which requires a model to predict the corresponding story ending when the condition is modified to a counterfactual one. Previous works have shown that the traditional sequence-to-sequence model cannot well handle this problem, as it often captures some spurious correlations between the original and counterfactual endings, instead of the causal relations between conditions and endings. To address this issue, we propose a sketch-and-customize generation model guided by the causality implicated in the conditions and endings. In the sketch stage, a skeleton is extracted by removing words which are conflict to the counterfactual condition, from the original ending. In the customize stage, a generation model is used to fill proper words in the skeleton under the guidance of the counterfactual condition. In this way, the obtained counterfactual ending is both relevant to the original ending and consistent with the counterfactual condition. Experimental results show that the proposed model generates much better endings, as compared with the traditional sequence-to-sequence model.

Systems used here must provide comprehensible and transparent information about their decisions. Especially for patients, who are mostly no healthcare experts, comprehensible information is extremely important to understand diagnoses and treatment options (e.g., [2, 3]). To support more transparent Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications, approaches for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) are an ongoing topic of high interest [4]. Especially in the field of computer vision, a common strategy to achieve this kind of transparency is the creation of saliency maps that highlight areas in the input that were important for the decision of the AI system. The problem with those explanation strategies is, that they require the user of the XAI system to perform an additional thought process: Having the information what areas were important for a certain decision inevitably leads to the question why these areas were of importance. Especially in scenarios where relevant differences in the input data are originating from textural information rather than spatial information of certain objects, it becomes clear that the raw information about where important areas are is not always sufficient. One XAI approach that goes another way to avoid the aforementioned problems, are Counterfactual Explanations. Counterfactual explanations try to help to understand why the actual decision was made instead of another one, by creating a slightly modified version of the input which results in another decision of the AI [5, 6]. Creating such a slightly modified input that changes the model's prediction is by no means a trivial task.

Abductive and counterfactual reasoning, core abilities of everyday human cognition, require reasoning about what might have happened at time t, while conditioning on multiple contexts from the relative past and future. However, simultaneous incorporation of past and future contexts using generative language models (LMs) can be challenging, as they are trained either to condition only on the past context or to perform narrowly scoped text-infilling. In this paper, we propose DeLorean, a new unsupervised decoding algorithm that can flexibly incorporate both the past and future contexts using only off-the-shelf, left-to-right language models and no supervision. The key intuition of our algorithm is incorporating the future through back-propagation, during which, we only update the internal representation of the output while fixing the model parameters. By alternating between forward and backward propagation, DeLorean can decode the output representation that reflects both the left and right contexts. We demonstrate that our approach is general and applicable to two nonmonotonic reasoning tasks: abductive text generation and counterfactual story revision, where DeLorean outperforms a range of unsupervised and some supervised methods, based on automatic and human evaluation.

Counterfactual reasoning requires predicting how alternative events, contrary to what actually happened, might have resulted in different outcomes. Despite being considered a necessary component of AI-complete systems, few resources have been developed for evaluating counterfactual reasoning in narratives. In this paper, we propose Counterfactual Story Rewriting: given an original story and an intervening counterfactual event, the task is to minimally revise the story to make it compatible with the given counterfactual event. Solving this task will require deep understanding of causal narrative chains and counterfactual invariance, and integration of such story reasoning capabilities into conditional language generation models. We present TimeTravel, a new dataset of 29,849 counterfactual rewritings, each with the original story, a counterfactual event, and human-generated revision of the original story compatible with the counterfactual event. Additionally, we include 80,115 counterfactual "branches" without a rewritten storyline to support future work on semi- or un-supervised approaches to counterfactual story rewriting. Finally, we evaluate the counterfactual rewriting capacities of several competitive baselines based on pretrained language models, and assess whether common overlap and model-based automatic metrics for text generation correlate well with human scores for counterfactual rewriting.