Causal mediation analysis provides techniques for defining and estimating effects that may be endowed with mechanistic interpretations. With many scientific investigations seeking to address mechanistic questions, causal direct and indirect effects have garnered much attention. The natural direct and indirect effects, the most widely used among such causal mediation estimands, are limited in their practical utility due to stringent identification requirements. Accordingly, considerable effort has been invested in developing alternative direct and indirect effect decompositions with relaxed identification requirements. Such efforts often yield effect definitions with nuanced and challenging interpretations. By contrast, relatively limited attention has been paid to relaxing the identification assumptions of the natural direct and indirect effects. Motivated by a secondary aim of a recent non-randomized vaccine prospective cohort study (NCT05168813), we present a set of relaxed conditions under which the natural direct effect is identifiable in spite of unobserved baseline confounding of the exposure-mediator pathway; we use this result to investigate the effect mediated by putative immune correlates of protection. Relaxing the commonly used but restrictive cross-world counterfactual independence assumption, we discuss strategies for evaluating the natural direct effect in non-randomized settings that arise in the analysis of vaccine studies. We revisit prior studies of semi-parametric efficiency theory to demonstrate the construction of flexible, multiply robust estimators of the natural direct effect and discuss efficient estimation strategies that do not place restrictive modeling assumptions on nuisance functions.

To design an efficient intervention, decision-makers need not only to estimate the total effect of the intervention, but also understand the underlying causal mechanisms driving this effect.

We next discuss two lines of related literature.

A popular class of analysis methods, often called structural analysis, aims to extract this information using probing classifiers that predict linguistic properties from representations of trained models (e.g., Adi et al., 2017; Conneau et al., 2018; Hupkes et al., 2018; Tenney et al., 2019).

We next discuss two lines of related literature.

To design an efficient intervention, decision-makers need not only to estimate the total effect of the intervention, but also understand the underlying causal mechanisms driving this effect.

As machine learning models become increasingly embedded in decision-making systems, the ability to "unlearn" targeted data or features is crucial for enhancing model adaptability, fairness, and privacy in models which involves expensive training. To effectively guide machine unlearning, a thorough testing is essential. Existing methods for verification of machine unlearning provide limited insights, often failing in scenarios where the influence is indirect. In this work, we propose CAFÉ, a new causality based framework that unifies datapoint- and feature-level unlearning for verification of black-box ML models. CAFÉ evaluates both direct and indirect effects of unlearning targets through causal dependencies, providing actionable insights with fine-grained analysis. Our evaluation across five datasets and three model architectures demonstrates that CAFÉ successfully detects residual influence missed by baselines while maintaining computational efficiency.

Synthetic data generation creates data based on real-world data using generative models. In health applications, generating high-quality data while maintaining fairness for sensitive attributes is essential for equitable outcomes. Existing GAN-based and LLM-based methods focus on counterfactual fairness and are primarily applied in finance and legal domains. Causal fairness provides a more comprehensive evaluation framework by preserving causal structure, but current synthetic data generation methods do not address it in health settings. To fill this gap, we develop the first LLM-augmented synthetic data generation method to enhance causal fairness using real-world tabular health data. Our generated data deviates by less than 10% from real data on causal fairness metrics. When trained on causally fair predictors, synthetic data reduces bias on the sensitive attribute by 70% compared to real data. This work improves access to fair synthetic data, supporting equitable health research and healthcare delivery.