Adaptivity Complexity for Causal Graph Discovery
This work addresses the trade-off between adaptivity and intervention efficiency in causal discovery, providing a flexible framework for practitioners constrained by sequential rounds, though it is incremental as it builds on existing adaptive and non-adaptive strategies.
The paper tackles the problem of causal graph discovery from interventional data by introducing an r-adaptive algorithm that minimizes the number of interventions, achieving an O(min{r, log n} * n^(1/min{r, log n})) approximation to the verification number, which is tight for all r and matches known bounds for non-adaptive and fully adaptive cases.
Causal discovery from interventional data is an important problem, where the task is to design an interventional strategy that learns the hidden ground truth causal graph $G(V,E)$ on $|V| = n$ nodes while minimizing the number of performed interventions. Most prior interventional strategies broadly fall into two categories: non-adaptive and adaptive. Non-adaptive strategies decide on a single fixed set of interventions to be performed while adaptive strategies can decide on which nodes to intervene on sequentially based on past interventions. While adaptive algorithms may use exponentially fewer interventions than their non-adaptive counterparts, there are practical concerns that constrain the amount of adaptivity allowed. Motivated by this trade-off, we study the problem of $r$-adaptivity, where the algorithm designer recovers the causal graph under a total of $r$ sequential rounds whilst trying to minimize the total number of interventions. For this problem, we provide a $r$-adaptive algorithm that achieves $O(\min\{r,\log n\} \cdot n^{1/\min\{r,\log n\}})$ approximation with respect to the verification number, a well-known lower bound for adaptive algorithms. Furthermore, for every $r$, we show that our approximation is tight. Our definition of $r$-adaptivity interpolates nicely between the non-adaptive ($r=1$) and fully adaptive ($r=n$) settings where our approximation simplifies to $O(n)$ and $O(\log n)$ respectively, matching the best-known approximation guarantees for both extremes. Our results also extend naturally to the bounded size interventions.