Ciarán Lee

Hadrien Reynaud, Athanasios Vlontzos, Mischa Dombrowski et al.

Causally-enabled machine learning frameworks could help clinicians to identify the best course of treatments by answering counterfactual questions. We explore this path for the case of echocardiograms by looking into the variation of the Left Ventricle Ejection Fraction, the most essential clinical metric gained from these examinations. We combine deep neural networks, twin causal networks and generative adversarial methods for the first time to build D'ARTAGNAN (Deep ARtificial Twin-Architecture GeNerAtive Networks), a novel causal generative model. We demonstrate the soundness of our approach on a synthetic dataset before applying it to cardiac ultrasound videos to answer the question: "What would this echocardiogram look like if the patient had a different ejection fraction?". To do so, we generate new ultrasound videos, retaining the video style and anatomy of the original patient, while modifying the Ejection Fraction conditioned on a given input. We achieve an SSIM score of 0.79 and an R2 score of 0.51 on the counterfactual videos. Code and models are available at: https://github.com/HReynaud/dartagnan.

Olivier Jeunen, Ciarán M. Gilligan-Lee, Rishabh Mehrotra et al.

The ability to answer causal questions is crucial in many domains, as causal inference allows one to understand the impact of interventions. In many applications, only a single intervention is possible at a given time. However, in some important areas, multiple interventions are concurrently applied. Disentangling the effects of single interventions from jointly applied interventions is a challenging task -- especially as simultaneously applied interventions can interact. This problem is made harder still by unobserved confounders, which influence both treatments and outcome. We address this challenge by aiming to learn the effect of a single-intervention from both observational data and sets of interventions. We prove that this is not generally possible, but provide identification proofs demonstrating that it can be achieved under non-linear continuous structural causal models with additive, multivariate Gaussian noise -- even when unobserved confounders are present. Importantly, we show how to incorporate observed covariates and learn heterogeneous treatment effects. Based on the identifiability proofs, we provide an algorithm that learns the causal model parameters by pooling data from different regimes and jointly maximizing the combined likelihood. The effectiveness of our method is empirically demonstrated on both synthetic and real-world data.

Jake Fawkes, Michael O'Riordan, Athanasios Vlontzos et al.

Observational data is often readily available in large quantities, but can lead to biased causal effect estimates due to the presence of unobserved confounding. Recent works attempt to remove this bias by supplementing observational data with experimental data, which, when available, is typically on a smaller scale due to the time and cost involved in running a randomised controlled trial. In this work, we prove a theorem that places fundamental limits on this ``best of both worlds'' approach. Using the framework of impossible inference, we show that although it is possible to use experimental data to \emph{falsify} causal effect estimates from observational data, in general it is not possible to \emph{validate} such estimates. Our theorem proves that while experimental data can be used to detect bias in observational studies, without additional assumptions on the smoothness of the correction function, it can not be used to remove it. We provide a practical example of such an assumption, developing a novel Gaussian Process based approach to construct intervals which contain the true treatment effect with high probability, both inside and outside of the support of the experimental data. We demonstrate our methodology on both simulated and semi-synthetic datasets and make the \href{https://github.com/Jakefawkes/Obs_and_exp_data}{code available}.

Alexander Lavin, Ciarán M. Gilligan-Lee, Alessya Visnjic et al.

The development and deployment of machine learning (ML) systems can be executed easily with modern tools, but the process is typically rushed and means-to-an-end. The lack of diligence can lead to technical debt, scope creep and misaligned objectives, model misuse and failures, and expensive consequences. Engineering systems, on the other hand, follow well-defined processes and testing standards to streamline development for high-quality, reliable results. The extreme is spacecraft systems, where mission critical measures and robustness are ingrained in the development process. Drawing on experience in both spacecraft engineering and ML (from research through product across domain areas), we have developed a proven systems engineering approach for machine learning development and deployment. Our "Machine Learning Technology Readiness Levels" (MLTRL) framework defines a principled process to ensure robust, reliable, and responsible systems while being streamlined for ML workflows, including key distinctions from traditional software engineering. Even more, MLTRL defines a lingua franca for people across teams and organizations to work collaboratively on artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies. Here we describe the framework and elucidate it with several real world use-cases of developing ML methods from basic research through productization and deployment, in areas such as medical diagnostics, consumer computer vision, satellite imagery, and particle physics.