We consider the following two-player game: using observational data, the leader chooses a prediction function for a response variable $Y$ from given covariates. The follower then reacts with an intervention on some covariates in the underlying structural causal model to maximize their own objective. The leader knows the intervention targets, but may have limited knowledge of the follower's objective. We call this setup a prediction-intervention game, a special case of a Stackelberg game. Finding an optimal strategy for the leader is generally difficult. To avoid severe performance loss, the leader may base their prediction on the causal parents of $Y$, or more generally on an invariant subset of covariates. We prove, for two common classes of follower objectives, that predictors based on the stable blanket, a specific invariant subset, are always better or as good as those based on the causal parents. We further upper bound the leader's post-intervention risk by a worst-case risk over allowed interventions and strengthen existing distribution generalization results to analyze this bound: we give sufficient conditions under which stable-blanket predictors are worst-case optimal, and show by examples that these conditions cannot in general be dropped. Finally, we discuss practical strategies for settings with known and unknown graph, and test them on simulated and real-world data.

Causal discovery, the problem of inferring the direction of causality, is generally ill-posed. We use the language of structural causal models (SCM) to show that assuming that the causal relations are acyclic and invariant across multiple environments (e.g., the way minimum wage affects employment rate is stable across different geographical regions), \textit{only} two auxiliary environments are sufficient to infer the causal graph for arbitrary nonlinear mechanisms. Moreover, we demonstrate that this implies identifiability of the SCM functional mechanisms: as a corollary, we show that \textit{two} auxiliary environments are sufficient to guarantee correct counterfactual inference. We empirically support our theoretical results on synthetic data.

Neanderthal'dentists' treated cavities 59,000 years ago A molar points to some sophisticated dental work performed by our extinct cousins. More information Adding us as a Preferred Source in Google by using this link indicates that you would like to see more of our content in Google News results. The molar tooth found in Chagyrskaya Cave and its macro-features. Breakthroughs, discoveries, and DIY tips sent six days a week. Neanderthals () were once considered to have been extremely primitive and unsophisticated compared to us humans ().

Soft Actor-Critic (SAC) and its variants dominate Multi-Task Reinforcement Learning (MTRL) due to their off-policy sample efficiency, while on-policy methods such as Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) remain underexplored. We diagnose that PPO in MTRL suffers from a previously overlooked issue: critic-side gradient ill-conditioning, which may cause tail tasks to stall while easy tasks dominate the value function's updates. To address this, we propose TOPPO (Tail-Optimized PPO), a reformulation of PPO via Critic Balancing -- a set of modules that improve gradient conditioning and balance learning dynamics across tasks. Unlike prior approaches that rely on modular architectures or large models, TOPPO targets the optimization bottleneck within PPO itself. Empirically, TOPPO achieves stronger mean and tail-task performance than published SAC-family and ARS-family baselines while using substantially fewer parameters and environment steps on Meta-World+ benchmark. Notably, TOPPO matches or surpasses strong SAC baselines early in training and maintains superior performance at full budget. Ablations confirm the effectiveness of each module in TOPPO and provide insights into their interactions. Our results demonstrate that, with proper optimization, on-policy methods can rival or exceed off-policy approaches in MTRL, challenging the prevailing reliance on SAC and highlighting critic-side gradient conditioning as the central bottleneck.

Causal abstraction offers a principled framework for mechanistic interpretability, aligning a high-level causal model with the low-level computation realized by a neural network through counterfactual intervention analysis. Existing methods such as distributed alignment search (DAS) learn expressive subspace interventions, but the relevant neural site is unknown a priori, so finding a handle requires a computationally burdensome search over candidate sites. We introduce PLOT (Progressive Localization via Optimal Transport), a transport-based framework that localizes causal variables from the output effect geometry of abstract and neural interventions. PLOT fits an optimal transport coupling between abstract variables and candidate neural sites, yielding a global soft correspondence that can be calibrated into intervention handles. In simple settings, a single coupling over individual neurons suffices. In larger models, PLOT is applied progressively, moving from coarse sites such as tokens, timesteps, or layers to finer supports such as coordinate groups or PCA spans, and optionally guiding DAS based on the localized signal. Across experiments of increasing complexity, transport-only PLOT handles are exceedingly fast and competitive on accuracy, while PLOT-guided DAS reaches DAS-level accuracy at a fraction of full DAS runtime, providing an efficient localization engine for causal abstraction research at scale.

Causal queries are often only partially identifiable from observational data, and experiments that could tighten the resulting bounds are typically costly. We study the problem of selecting, prior to observing experimental outcomes, a cost-constrained subset of experiments that maximally tightens bounds on a target query. We formalize this as the max-potency problem, where epistemic potency measures the worst-case reduction in bound width guaranteed by an experiment, and show that this problem is NP-hard via a reduction from 0-1 knapsack. Building on the polynomial-programming framework of Duarte et al. (2023), we give a general procedure for evaluating epistemic potency in discrete settings. To control the super-exponential search space, we introduce two graphical pruning criteria that depend only on the causal graph and the query: a novel path-interception rule that exploits district structure to certify zero potency in linear time, and an identifiability check based on the ID algorithm. On Erdos-Renyi random graphs and 11 bnlearn benchmark networks, the two criteria together prune 50-88% of candidate experiments on average without solving a single polynomial program. For the general subset search, we show that ID-pruned experiments are combinatorially inert, yielding a super-exponential reduction in the number of subsets evaluated. We close with an end-to-end demonstration on observational NHANES data, selecting optimal experiments for estimating the effect of physical activity on diabetes.

In networks, effective dynamic treatment allocation requires deciding both whom to treat and also when, so as to amplify policy impact through spillovers. An early intervention at a well-connected node can trigger cascades that change which nodes are worth targeting in the next period. Existing treatment strategies under network interference are largely static while dynamic treatment frameworks typically ignore network structure altogether. We integrate these perspectives and propose Q-Ising, a three-stage pipeline that (i) estimates network adoption dynamics via a Bayesian dynamic Ising model from a single observed panel, (ii) augments treatment adoption histories with continuous posterior latent states, and (iii) learns a dynamic policy via offline reinforcement learning. The Bayesian mechanism enables uncertainty quantification over dynamic decisions, yielding posterior ensemble policies with interpretable spillover estimates. We provide a finite-sample regret upper bound that decomposes into standard offline-RL uncertainty, network abstraction error, and first stage error in Ising state estimation. We apply our method to data from Indian village microfinance networks and synthetic stochastic block models under simulated heterogeneous susceptible-infected-susceptible (SIS) dynamics and demonstrate that adaptive targeting outperforms static centrality benchmarks.

Despite the prevalence of the attention sink phenomenon in Large Language Models (LLMs), where initial tokens disproportionately monopolize attention scores, its structural origins remain elusive. This work provides a \textit{mechanistic explanation} for this phenomenon. First, we trace its root to the value aggregation process inherent in self-attention, which induces a systematic variance discrepancy. We further demonstrate that this discrepancy is drastically amplified by the activation of super neurons within Feed-Forward Network (FFN) layers. Specifically, the channel-sparse down-projections trigger a dimension disparity of the first-token representation, necessitating the formation of attention sinks as a structural anchor. Then, we validate this causal chain through two controlled interventions: (i) isolating the aggregation effect via attention mask modifications and (ii) amplifying the variance of targeted token representations. Both interventions can replicate attention sinks at arbitrary positions. Our mechanistic understanding offers a foundation for the systematic control of sink formation. Finally, as a proof of concept, we propose \textit{head-wise RMSNorm}, an architectural modification that stabilizes value aggregation outputs during pre-training. Our experiments demonstrate that restoring statistical parity across positions significantly accelerates convergence.

Deep learning models for drug--target interaction (DTI) prediction often achieve strong benchmark performance without necessarily relying on mechanistically meaningful molecular features, a limitation that standard accuracy-based evaluation cannot detect. We introduce ISAAC (Intervention-based Structural Auditing Approach for Causal Reasoning), a post-hoc framework that evaluates prior-relative structural sensitivity by probing frozen models through matched mechanistic and spurious input-level interventions, independently of predictive accuracy. Applied to three sequence-based DTI architectures on the Davis benchmark, ISAAC reveals approximately 25\% relative differences in reasoning scores across models with comparable AUROC (within around 3\%), stable across training and intervention seeds and two distinct perturbation operators. These discrepancies, undetectable under conventional accuracy metrics, motivate the use of post-hoc structural auditing as a complement to standard performance evaluation in scientific machine learning for molecular modeling.

Transformers are effective at inferring the latent task from context via two inference modes: recognizing a task seen during training, and adapting to a novel one. Recent interpretability studies have identified from middle-layer representations task-specific directions, or task vectors, that steer model behavior. However, a lack of rigorous foundations hinders connecting internal representations to external model behavior: existing work fails to explain how task-vector geometry is shaped by the training distribution, and what geometry enables out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization. In this paper, we study these questions in a controlled synthetic setting by training small transformers from scratch on latent-task sequence distributions, which allows a principled mathematical characterization. We show that two inference modes can coexist within a single model. In-distribution behavior is governed by Bayesian task retrieval, implemented internally through convex combinations of learned task vectors. OOD behavior, by contrast, arises through extrapolative task learning, whose representations occupy a subspace nearly orthogonal to the task-vector subspace. Taken together, our results suggest that task-vector geometry, training distributions, and generalization behaviors are closely related.