For two causal structures with the same set of visible variables, one is said to observationally dominate the other if the set of distributions over the visible variables realizable by the first contains the set of distributions over the visible variables realizable by the second. Knowing such dominance relations is useful for adjudicating between these structures given observational data. We here consider the problem of determining the partial order of equivalence classes of causal structures with latent variables relative to observational dominance. We provide a complete characterization of the dominance order in the case of three visible variables, and a partial characterization in the case of four visible variables. Our techniques also help to identify which observational equivalence classes have a set of realizable distributions that is characterized by nontrivial inequality constraints, analogous to Bell inequalities and instrumental inequalities. We find evidence that as one increases the number of visible variables, the equivalence classes satisfying nontrivial inequality constraints become ubiquitous. (Because such classes are the ones for which there can be a difference in the distributions that are quantumly and classically realizable, this implies that the potential for quantum-classical gaps is also ubiquitous.) Furthermore, we find evidence that constraint-based causal discovery algorithms that rely solely on conditional independence constraints have a significantly weaker distinguishing power among observational equivalence classes than algorithms that go beyond these (i.e., algorithms that also leverage nested Markov constraints and inequality constraints).

The classical causal relations between a set of variables, some observed and some latent, can induce both equality constraints (typically conditional independences) as well as inequality constraints (Instrumental and Bell inequalities being prototypical examples) on their compatible distribution over the observed variables. Enumerating a causal structure's implied inequality constraints is generally far more difficult than enumerating its equalities. Furthermore, only inequality constraints ever admit violation by quantum correlations. For both those reasons, it is important to classify causal scenarios into those which impose inequality constraints versus those which do not. Here we develop methods for detecting such scenarios by appealing to d-separation, e-separation, and incompatible supports. Many (perhaps all?) scenarios with exclusively equality constraints can be detected via a condition articulated by Henson, Lal and Pusey (HLP). Considering all scenarios with up to 4 observed variables, which number in the thousands, we are able to resolve all but three causal scenarios, providing evidence that the HLP condition is, in fact, exhaustive.

There are several existing algorithms that under appropriate assumptions can reliably identify a subset of the underlying causal relationships from observational data. This paper introduces the first computationally feasible score-based algorithm that can reliably identify causal relationships in the large sample limit for discrete models, while allowing for the possibility that there are unobserved common causes. In doing so, the algorithm does not ever need to assign scores to causal structures with unobserved common causes. The algorithm is based on the identification of so called Y substructures within Bayesian network structures that can be learned from observational data. An example of a Y substructure is A -> C, B -> C, C -> D. After providing background on causal discovery, the paper proves the conditions under which the algorithm is reliable in the large sample limit.