A growing body of work has begun to study intervention design for efficient structure learning of causal directed acyclic graphs (DAGs).

We argue that this is rooted in a CBM's lack of

Identifying a causal model of an IT system is fundamental to many branches of systems engineering and operation. Such a model can be used to predict the effects of control actions, optimize operations, diagnose failures, detect intrusions, etc., which is central to achieving the longstanding goal of automating network and system management tasks. Traditionally, causal models have been designed and maintained by domain experts. This, however, proves increasingly challenging with the growing complexity and dynamism of modern IT systems. In this paper, we present the first principled method for online, data-driven identification of an IT system in the form of a causal model. The method, which we call active causal learning, estimates causal functions that capture the dependencies among system variables in an iterative fashion using Gaussian process regression based on system measurements, which are collected through a rollout-based intervention policy. We prove that this method is optimal in the Bayesian sense and that it produces effective interventions. Experimental validation on a testbed shows that our method enables accurate identification of a causal system model while inducing low interference with system operations.

A growing body of work has begun to study intervention design for efficient structure learning of causal directed acyclic graphs (DAGs). A typical setting is a causally sufficient setting, i.e. a system with no latent confounders, selection

Managing physiological variables within clinically safe target zones is a central challenge in healthcare, particularly for chronic conditions such as Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus (T1DM). Reinforcement learning (RL) offers promise for personalising treatment, but struggles with the delayed and heterogeneous effects of interventions. We propose a novel RL framework to study and support decision-making in T1DM technologies, such as automated insulin delivery. Our approach captures the complex temporal dynamics of treatment by unifying two control modalities: \textit{impulse control} for discrete, fast-acting interventions (e.g., insulin boluses), and \textit{switching control} for longer-acting treatments and regime shifts. The core of our method is a constrained Markov decision process augmented with physiological state features, enabling safe policy learning under clinical and resource constraints. The framework incorporates biologically realistic factors, including insulin decay, leading to policies that better reflect real-world therapeutic behaviour. While not intended for clinical deployment, this work establishes a foundation for future safe and temporally-aware RL in healthcare. We provide theoretical guarantees of convergence and demonstrate empirical improvements in a stylised T1DM control task, reducing blood glucose level violations from 22.4\% (state-of-the-art) to as low as 10.8\%.

We propose an algorithm for change point monitoring in linear causal models that accounts for interventions. Through a special centralization technique, we can concentrate the changes arising from causal propagation across nodes into a single dimension. Additionally, by selecting appropriate intervention nodes based on Kullback-Leibler divergence, we can amplify the change magnitude. We also present an algorithm for selecting the intervention values, which aids in the identification of the most effective intervention nodes. Two monitoring methods are proposed, each with an adaptive intervention policy to make a balance between exploration and exploitation. We theoretically demonstrate the first-order optimality of the proposed methods and validate their properties using simulation datasets and two real-world case studies.

The paper proposes an algorithm that can learn good decision-making policies over a continuous set of decisions using only access to observational data. The problem is well-motivated, but the paper can be substantially strengthened. Quality: Ok The paper clearly motivates a weakness of direct regression (e.g. from context and decision, to predict expected cost). The regression models may have different uncertainty for different decisions, and so it is useful to include an empirical estimate of variance and bias of the regression when selecting decisions. The paper will be more informative by highlighting several choices of regression models, each with different V (variance) and B (bias), and observing how lambda_1 lambda_2 are tuned to pick low-cost decisions with high probability.