Dhanya Sridhar

Dhanya Sridhar, Caterina De Bacco, David Blei

We consider the problem of estimating social influence, the effect that a person's behavior has on the future behavior of their peers. The key challenge is that shared behavior between friends could be equally explained by influence or by two other confounding factors: 1) latent traits that caused people to both become friends and engage in the behavior, and 2) latent preferences for the behavior. This paper addresses the challenges of estimating social influence with three contributions. First, we formalize social influence as a causal effect, one which requires inferences about hypothetical interventions. Second, we develop Poisson Influence Factorization (PIF), a method for estimating social influence from observational data. PIF fits probabilistic factor models to networks and behavior data to infer variables that serve as substitutes for the confounding latent traits. Third, we develop assumptions under which PIF recovers estimates of social influence. We empirically study PIF with semi-synthetic and real data from Last.fm, and conduct a sensitivity analysis. We find that PIF estimates social influence most accurately compared to related methods and remains robust under some violations of its assumptions.

Antonio Gois, Sophia Gunluk, Nir Rosenfeld et al.

In strategic classification, an institution (e.g., a bank) anticipates adaptation from users who change their features to increase utility in a classification task (e.g., loan repayment). Since a key challenge is the distribution shift induced by users, we turn to causal models, which have been shown to bound the worst-case out-of-distribution (OOD) risk, and establish several new results that link causality and strategic classification. First, we show that causal classification leads to optimal classification error after any sufficiently large adaptation, when the noise is bounded in a certain way. Second, when these assumptions do not hold, we show OOD cross-entropy risk of optimal classifiers decomposes into an OOD bias term and a term arising from not using all observable features, allowing us to understand when causal classifiers have an advantage. Finally, we show that the use of causal features can allow alignment of long-term incentives between institutions and users, contrasting with previous work that highlights social costs of such approaches. We validate our theory empirically on synthetic data, finding that our results predict behavior in practice.

Shruti Joshi, Aaron Mueller, David Klindt et al.

Interpretability research on large language models (LLMs) has yielded important insights into model behaviour, yet recurring pitfalls persist: findings that do not generalise, and causal interpretations that outrun the evidence. Our position is that causal inference specifies what constitutes a valid mapping from model activations to invariant high-level structures, the data or assumptions needed to achieve it, and the inferences it can support. Specifically, Pearl's causal hierarchy clarifies what an interpretability study can justify. Observations establish associations between model behaviour and internal components. Interventions (e.g., ablations or activation patching) support claims how these edits affect a behavioural metric (\eg, average change in token probabilities) over a set of prompts. However, counterfactual claims -- i.e., asking what the model output would have been for the same prompt under an unobserved intervention -- remain largely unverifiable without controlled supervision. We show how causal representation learning (CRL) operationalises this hierarchy, specifying which variables are recoverable from activations and under what assumptions. Together, these motivate a diagnostic framework that helps practitioners select methods and evaluations matching claims to evidence such that findings generalise.

Eric Elmoznino, Tom Marty, Tejas Kasetty et al.

A central goal of machine learning is generalization. While the No Free Lunch Theorem states that we cannot obtain theoretical guarantees for generalization without further assumptions, in practice we observe that simple models which explain the training data generalize best: a principle called Occam's razor. Despite the need for simple models, most current approaches in machine learning only minimize the training error, and at best indirectly promote simplicity through regularization or architecture design. Here, we draw a connection between Occam's razor and in-context learning: an emergent ability of certain sequence models like Transformers to learn at inference time from past observations in a sequence. In particular, we show that the next-token prediction loss used to train in-context learners is directly equivalent to a data compression technique called prequential coding, and that minimizing this loss amounts to jointly minimizing both the training error and the complexity of the model that was implicitly learned from context. Our theory and the empirical experiments we use to support it not only provide a normative account of in-context learning, but also elucidate the shortcomings of current in-context learning methods, suggesting ways in which they can be improved. We make our code available at https://github.com/3rdCore/PrequentialCode.

Tom Marty, Eric Elmoznino, Leo Gagnon et al.

Deep neural networks exhibit a simplicity bias, a well-documented tendency to favor simple functions over complex ones. In this work, we cast new light on this phenomenon through the lens of the Minimum Description Length principle, formalizing supervised learning as a problem of optimal two-part lossless compression. Our theory explains how simplicity bias governs feature selection in neural networks through a fundamental trade-off between model complexity (the cost of describing the hypothesis) and predictive power (the cost of describing the data). Our framework predicts that as the amount of available training data increases, learners transition through qualitatively different features -- from simple spurious shortcuts to complex features -- only when the reduction in data encoding cost justifies the increased model complexity. Consequently, we identify distinct data regimes where increasing data promotes robustness by ruling out trivial shortcuts, and conversely, regimes where limiting data can act as a form of complexity-based regularization, preventing the learning of unreliable complex environmental cues. We validate our theory on a semi-synthetic benchmark showing that the feature selection of neural networks follows the same trajectory of solutions as optimal two-part compressors.

Victor Veitch, Dhanya Sridhar, David M. Blei

Does adding a theorem to a paper affect its chance of acceptance? Does labeling a post with the author's gender affect the post popularity? This paper develops a method to estimate such causal effects from observational text data, adjusting for confounding features of the text such as the subject or writing quality. We assume that the text suffices for causal adjustment but that, in practice, it is prohibitively high-dimensional. To address this challenge, we develop causally sufficient embeddings, low-dimensional document representations that preserve sufficient information for causal identification and allow for efficient estimation of causal effects. Causally sufficient embeddings combine two ideas. The first is supervised dimensionality reduction: causal adjustment requires only the aspects of text that are predictive of both the treatment and outcome. The second is efficient language modeling: representations of text are designed to dispose of linguistically irrelevant information, and this information is also causally irrelevant. Our method adapts language models (specifically, word embeddings and topic models) to learn document embeddings that are able to predict both treatment and outcome. We study causally sufficient embeddings with semi-synthetic datasets and find that they improve causal estimation over related embedding methods. We illustrate the methods by answering the two motivating questions---the effect of a theorem on paper acceptance and the effect of a gender label on post popularity. Code and data available at https://github.com/vveitch/causal-text-embeddings-tf2}{github.com/vveitch/causal-text-embeddings-tf2

Philippe Brouillard, Chandler Squires, Jonas Wahl et al.

Causal discovery aims to automatically uncover causal relationships from data, a capability with significant potential across many scientific disciplines. However, its real-world applications remain limited. Current methods often rely on unrealistic assumptions and are evaluated only on simple synthetic toy datasets, often with inadequate evaluation metrics. In this paper, we substantiate these claims by performing a systematic review of the recent causal discovery literature. We present applications in biology, neuroscience, and Earth sciences - fields where causal discovery holds promise for addressing key challenges. We highlight available simulated and real-world datasets from these domains and discuss common assumption violations that have spurred the development of new methods. Our goal is to encourage the community to adopt better evaluation practices by utilizing realistic datasets and more adequate metrics.

Shruti Joshi, Andrea Dittadi, Sébastien Lachapelle et al.

Steering methods manipulate the representations of large language models (LLMs) to induce responses that have desired properties, e.g., truthfulness, offering a promising approach for LLM alignment without the need for fine-tuning. Traditionally, steering has relied on supervision, such as from contrastive pairs of prompts that vary in a single target concept, which is costly to obtain and limits the speed of steering research. An appealing alternative is to use unsupervised approaches such as sparse autoencoders (SAEs) to map LLM embeddings to sparse representations that capture human-interpretable concepts. However, without further assumptions, SAEs may not be identifiable: they could learn latent dimensions that entangle multiple concepts, leading to unintentional steering of unrelated properties. We introduce Sparse Shift Autoencoders (SSAEs) that instead map the differences between embeddings to sparse representations. Crucially, we show that SSAEs are identifiable from paired observations that vary in \textit{multiple unknown concepts}, leading to accurate steering of single concepts without the need for supervision. We empirically demonstrate accurate steering across semi-synthetic and real-world language datasets using Llama-3.1 embeddings.

Tejas Kasetty, Divyat Mahajan, Gintare Karolina Dziugaite et al.

Numerous decision-making tasks require estimating causal effects under interventions on different parts of a system. As practitioners consider using large language models (LLMs) to automate decisions, studying their causal reasoning capabilities becomes crucial. A recent line of work evaluates LLMs ability to retrieve commonsense causal facts, but these evaluations do not sufficiently assess how LLMs reason about interventions. Motivated by the role that interventions play in causal inference, in this paper, we conduct empirical analyses to evaluate whether LLMs can accurately update their knowledge of a data-generating process in response to an intervention. We create benchmarks that span diverse causal graphs (e.g., confounding, mediation) and variable types, and enable a study of intervention-based reasoning. These benchmarks allow us to isolate the ability of LLMs to accurately predict changes resulting from their ability to memorize facts or find other shortcuts. We evaluate six LLMs on the benchmarks, finding that GPT models show promising accuracy at predicting the intervention effects.

Sophie Xhonneux, David Dobre, Jian Tang et al.

Despite significant investment into safety training, large language models (LLMs) deployed in the real world still suffer from numerous vulnerabilities. One perspective on LLM safety training is that it algorithmically forbids the model from answering toxic or harmful queries. To assess the effectiveness of safety training, in this work, we study forbidden tasks, i.e., tasks the model is designed to refuse to answer. Specifically, we investigate whether in-context learning (ICL) can be used to re-learn forbidden tasks despite the explicit fine-tuning of the model to refuse them. We first examine a toy example of refusing sentiment classification to demonstrate the problem. Then, we use ICL on a model fine-tuned to refuse to summarise made-up news articles. Finally, we investigate whether ICL can undo safety training, which could represent a major security risk. For the safety task, we look at Vicuna-7B, Starling-7B, and Llama2-7B. We show that the attack works out-of-the-box on Starling-7B and Vicuna-7B but fails on Llama2-7B. Finally, we propose an ICL attack that uses the chat template tokens like a prompt injection attack to achieve a better attack success rate on Vicuna-7B and Starling-7B. Trigger Warning: the appendix contains LLM-generated text with violence, suicide, and misinformation.

Shruti Joshi, Théo Saulus, Wieland Brendel et al.

Identifiability in representation learning is commonly evaluated using standard metrics (e.g., MCC, DCI, R^2) on synthetic benchmarks with known ground-truth factors. These metrics are assumed to reflect recovery up to the equivalence class guaranteed by identifiability theory. We show that this assumption holds only under specific structural conditions: each metric implicitly encodes assumptions about both the data-generating process (DGP) and the encoder. When these assumptions are violated, metrics become misspecified and can produce systematic false positives and false negatives. Such failures occur both within classical identifiability regimes and in post-hoc settings where identifiability is most needed. We introduce a taxonomy separating DGP assumptions from encoder geometry, use it to characterise the validity domains of existing metrics, and release an evaluation suite for reproducible stress testing and comparison.

Marco Jiralerspong, Thomas Jiralerspong, Vedant Shah et al.

Given two sets of elements (such as cell types and drug compounds), researchers typically only have access to a limited subset of their interactions. The task of causal imputation involves using this subset to predict unobserved interactions. Squires et al. (2022) have proposed two estimators for this task based on the synthetic interventions (SI) estimator: SI-A (for actions) and SI-C (for contexts). We extend their work and introduce a novel causal imputation estimator, generalized synthetic interventions (GSI). We prove the identifiability of this estimator for data generated from a more complex latent factor model. On synthetic and real data we show empirically that it recovers or outperforms their estimators.

Gemma E. Moran, Dhanya Sridhar, Yixin Wang et al.

We develop the sparse VAE for unsupervised representation learning on high-dimensional data. The sparse VAE learns a set of latent factors (representations) which summarize the associations in the observed data features. The underlying model is sparse in that each observed feature (i.e. each dimension of the data) depends on a small subset of the latent factors. As examples, in ratings data each movie is only described by a few genres; in text data each word is only applicable to a few topics; in genomics, each gene is active in only a few biological processes. We prove such sparse deep generative models are identifiable: with infinite data, the true model parameters can be learned. (In contrast, most deep generative models are not identifiable.) We empirically study the sparse VAE with both simulated and real data. We find that it recovers meaningful latent factors and has smaller heldout reconstruction error than related methods.

Amir Feder, Katherine A. Keith, Emaad Manzoor et al.

A fundamental goal of scientific research is to learn about causal relationships. However, despite its critical role in the life and social sciences, causality has not had the same importance in Natural Language Processing (NLP), which has traditionally placed more emphasis on predictive tasks. This distinction is beginning to fade, with an emerging area of interdisciplinary research at the convergence of causal inference and language processing. Still, research on causality in NLP remains scattered across domains without unified definitions, benchmark datasets and clear articulations of the challenges and opportunities in the application of causal inference to the textual domain, with its unique properties. In this survey, we consolidate research across academic areas and situate it in the broader NLP landscape. We introduce the statistical challenge of estimating causal effects with text, encompassing settings where text is used as an outcome, treatment, or to address confounding. In addition, we explore potential uses of causal inference to improve the robustness, fairness, and interpretability of NLP models. We thus provide a unified overview of causal inference for the NLP community.

Reid Pryzant, Dallas Card, Dan Jurafsky et al.

We consider the problem of using observational data to estimate the causal effects of linguistic properties. For example, does writing a complaint politely lead to a faster response time? How much will a positive product review increase sales? This paper addresses two technical challenges related to the problem before developing a practical method. First, we formalize the causal quantity of interest as the effect of a writer's intent, and establish the assumptions necessary to identify this from observational data. Second, in practice, we only have access to noisy proxies for the linguistic properties of interest -- e.g., predictions from classifiers and lexicons. We propose an estimator for this setting and prove that its bias is bounded when we perform an adjustment for the text. Based on these results, we introduce TextCause, an algorithm for estimating causal effects of linguistic properties. The method leverages (1) distant supervision to improve the quality of noisy proxies, and (2) a pre-trained language model (BERT) to adjust for the text. We show that the proposed method outperforms related approaches when estimating the effect of Amazon review sentiment on semi-simulated sales figures. Finally, we present an applied case study investigating the effects of complaint politeness on bureaucratic response times.

Jason Hartford, Victor Veitch, Dhanya Sridhar et al.

Instrumental variable methods provide a powerful approach to estimating causal effects in the presence of unobserved confounding. But a key challenge when applying them is the reliance on untestable "exclusion" assumptions that rule out any relationship between the instrument variable and the response that is not mediated by the treatment. In this paper, we show how to perform consistent IV estimation despite violations of the exclusion assumption. In particular, we show that when one has multiple candidate instruments, only a majority of these candidates---or, more generally, the modal candidate-response relationship---needs to be valid to estimate the causal effect. Our approach uses an estimate of the modal prediction from an ensemble of instrumental variable estimators. The technique is simple to apply and is "black-box" in the sense that it may be used with any instrumental variable estimator as long as the treatment effect is identified for each valid instrument independently. As such, it is compatible with recent machine-learning based estimators that allow for the estimation of conditional average treatment effects (CATE) on complex, high dimensional data. Experimentally, we achieve accurate estimates of conditional average treatment effects using an ensemble of deep network-based estimators, including on a challenging simulated Mendelian Randomization problem.

Dhanya Sridhar, Lise Getoor

Statistical methods applied to social media posts shed light on the dynamics of online dialogue. For example, users' wording choices predict their persuasiveness and users adopt the language patterns of other dialogue participants. In this paper, we estimate the causal effect of reply tones in debates on linguistic and sentiment changes in subsequent responses. The challenge for this estimation is that a reply's tone and subsequent responses are confounded by the users' ideologies on the debate topic and their emotions. To overcome this challenge, we learn representations of ideology using generative models of text. We study debates from 4Forums and compare annotated tones of replying such as emotional versus factual, or reasonable versus attacking. We show that our latent confounder representation reduces bias in ATE estimation. Our results suggest that factual and asserting tones affect dialogue and provide a methodology for estimating causal effects from text.

Yixin Wang, Dhanya Sridhar, David M. Blei

Machine learning (ML) can automate decision-making by learning to predict decisions from historical data. However, these predictors may inherit discriminatory policies from past decisions and reproduce unfair decisions. In this paper, we propose two algorithms that adjust fitted ML predictors to make them fair. We focus on two legal notions of fairness: (a) providing equal opportunity (EO) to individuals regardless of sensitive attributes and (b) repairing historical disadvantages through affirmative action (AA). More technically, we produce fair EO and AA predictors by positing a causal model and considering counterfactual decisions. We prove that the resulting predictors are theoretically optimal in predictive performance while satisfying fairness. We evaluate the algorithms, and the trade-offs between accuracy and fairness, on datasets about admissions, income, credit and recidivism.

Varun Embar, Dhanya Sridhar, Golnoosh Farnadi et al.

Statistical relational frameworks such as Markov logic networks and probabilistic soft logic (PSL) encode model structure with weighted first-order logical clauses. Learning these clauses from data is referred to as structure learning. Structure learning alleviates the manual cost of specifying models. However, this benefit comes with high computational costs; structure learning typically requires an expensive search over the space of clauses which involves repeated optimization of clause weights. In this paper, we propose the first two approaches to structure learning for PSL. We introduce a greedy search-based algorithm and a novel optimization method that trade-off scalability and approximations to the structure learning problem in varying ways. The highly scalable optimization method combines data-driven generation of clauses with a piecewise pseudolikelihood (PPLL) objective that learns model structure by optimizing clause weights only once. We compare both methods across five real-world tasks, showing that PPLL achieves an order of magnitude runtime speedup and AUC gains up to 15% over greedy search.

Dhanya Sridhar, Jay Pujara, Lise Getoor

Knowledge bases (KB) constructed through information extraction from text play an important role in query answering and reasoning. In this work, we study a particular reasoning task, the problem of discovering causal relationships between entities, known as causal discovery. There are two contrasting types of approaches to discovering causal knowledge. One approach attempts to identify causal relationships from text using automatic extraction techniques, while the other approach infers causation from observational data. However, extractions alone are often insufficient to capture complex patterns and full observational data is expensive to obtain. We introduce a probabilistic method for fusing noisy extractions with observational data to discover causal knowledge. We propose a principled approach that uses the probabilistic soft logic (PSL) framework to encode well-studied constraints to recover long-range patterns and consistent predictions, while cheaply acquired extractions provide a proxy for unseen observations. We apply our method gene regulatory networks and show the promise of exploiting KB signals in causal discovery, suggesting a critical, new area of research.

Shobeir Fakhraei, Dhanya Sridhar, Jay Pujara et al.

A neighborhood graph, which represents the instances as vertices and their relations as weighted edges, is the basis of many semi-supervised and relational models for node labeling and link prediction. Most methods employ a sequential process to construct the neighborhood graph. This process often consists of generating a candidate graph, pruning the candidate graph to make a neighborhood graph, and then performing inference on the variables (i.e., nodes) in the neighborhood graph. In this paper, we propose a framework that can dynamically adapt the neighborhood graph based on the states of variables from intermediate inference results, as well as structural properties of the relations connecting them. A key strength of our framework is its ability to handle multi-relational data and employ varying amounts of relations for each instance based on the intermediate inference results. We formulate the link prediction task as inference on neighborhood graphs, and include preliminary results illustrating the effects of different strategies in our proposed framework.