Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Causal discovery with endogenous context variables

Wiebke Günther, Oana-Iuliana Popescu, Martin Rabel, Urmi Ninad, Andreas Gerhardus, Jakob Runge

TL;DR

The authors address causal discovery when context variables that modulate causal mechanisms may be endogenous, complicating traditional methods. They introduce an adaptive constraint-based algorithm that tests independence either on context-specific data or on pooled data to recover per-context and union graphs, tying results to a formal SCM framework with descriptive, physical, and counterfactual graphs. Under suitable sufficiency and faithfulness assumptions, the method is sound and yields interpretable context-specific causal changes while mitigating selection bias. Simulation results demonstrate improved finite-sample performance over masking or pooling baselines and reveal the method’s limitations with large cycles and uncertain context-system links. The work enables robust inference of context-dependent mechanisms with endogenous contexts and points to extensions for time-series data and richer orientation rules.

Abstract

Causal systems often exhibit variations of the underlying causal mechanisms between the variables of the system. Often, these changes are driven by different environments or internal states in which the system operates, and we refer to context variables as those variables that indicate this change in causal mechanisms. An example are the causal relations in soil moisture-temperature interactions and their dependence on soil moisture regimes: Dry soil triggers a dependence of soil moisture on latent heat, while environments with wet soil do not feature such a feedback, making it a context-specific property. Crucially, a regime or context variable such as soil moisture need not be exogenous and can be influenced by the dynamical system variables - precipitation can make a dry soil wet - leading to joint systems with endogenous context variables. In this work we investigate the assumptions for constraint-based causal discovery of context-specific information in systems with endogenous context variables. We show that naive approaches such as learning different regime graphs on masked data, or pooling all data, can lead to uninformative results. We propose an adaptive constraint-based discovery algorithm and give a detailed discussion on the connection to structural causal models, including sufficiency assumptions, which allow to prove the soundness of our algorithm and to interpret the results causally. Numerical experiments demonstrate the performance of the proposed method over alternative baselines, but they also unveil current limitations of our method.

Causal discovery with endogenous context variables

TL;DR

The authors address causal discovery when context variables that modulate causal mechanisms may be endogenous, complicating traditional methods. They introduce an adaptive constraint-based algorithm that tests independence either on context-specific data or on pooled data to recover per-context and union graphs, tying results to a formal SCM framework with descriptive, physical, and counterfactual graphs. Under suitable sufficiency and faithfulness assumptions, the method is sound and yields interpretable context-specific causal changes while mitigating selection bias. Simulation results demonstrate improved finite-sample performance over masking or pooling baselines and reveal the method’s limitations with large cycles and uncertain context-system links. The work enables robust inference of context-dependent mechanisms with endogenous contexts and points to extensions for time-series data and richer orientation rules.

Abstract

Causal systems often exhibit variations of the underlying causal mechanisms between the variables of the system. Often, these changes are driven by different environments or internal states in which the system operates, and we refer to context variables as those variables that indicate this change in causal mechanisms. An example are the causal relations in soil moisture-temperature interactions and their dependence on soil moisture regimes: Dry soil triggers a dependence of soil moisture on latent heat, while environments with wet soil do not feature such a feedback, making it a context-specific property. Crucially, a regime or context variable such as soil moisture need not be exogenous and can be influenced by the dynamical system variables - precipitation can make a dry soil wet - leading to joint systems with endogenous context variables. In this work we investigate the assumptions for constraint-based causal discovery of context-specific information in systems with endogenous context variables. We show that naive approaches such as learning different regime graphs on masked data, or pooling all data, can lead to uninformative results. We propose an adaptive constraint-based discovery algorithm and give a detailed discussion on the connection to structural causal models, including sufficiency assumptions, which allow to prove the soundness of our algorithm and to interpret the results causally. Numerical experiments demonstrate the performance of the proposed method over alternative baselines, but they also unveil current limitations of our method.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 60 sections, 12 theorems, 18 equations, 12 figures, 2 tables, 1 algorithm.

Key Result

Lemma 4.1

Assume strong context-acyclicity, causal sufficiency, and single-graph-sufficiency. If $X$ and $Y$, both $X, Y\neq R$, with $Y \notin\mathop{\mathrm{Anc}}\nolimits^{\text{\normalfont{descr}}}_{R=r}(X)$ (this is not a restriction by context-acyclicity, rather fixes notation), are not adjacent in $G^{

Figures (12)

  • Figure 1: In this strongly simplified example, the variable soil moisture (SM) is an endogenous context variable influenced by variables such as precipitation (TP) and latent heat flux (LH) in both wet and dry regimes of SM, represented by solid edges. In dry conditions only, a feedback loop from the latent heat flux to the soil moisture is created because the soil additionally reflects the heat, represented by the dashed edge (a feedback loop is a time-delayed cycle, leading to a cyclic summary graph representation while the underlying time-series graph remains acyclic).
  • Figure 2: Left: An example of an SCM where the physical and descriptive graphs are the same. Right: an example of an SCM where the physical and descriptive graphs differ, c.f. the "support problem". For $G^{\text{\normalfont{mask}}}$, $R$ is not shown, as it is a constant per dataset, and links with other variables will not be found. Context-specific graphs depend on the value $r$ of $R$ and are summarized in a single diagram containing a solid edge for edges that are present in both contexts and a dashed edge for edges that are present for exactly one of the two contexts.
  • Figure 3: Results for our algorithm PC-AC (adaptive context, our method), PC-M (masking), PC-B (baseline), and PC-P (pooled) on the setup described in Sec. \ref{['sec:experimental_setup']}. Dotted lines indicate settings where links from the context indicator $R$ to its children are fixed / known (adj. $R$-ch.), solid lines indicate no prior knowledge about links (adj. none). The left panel shows results using a parametric CIT, and the right panel shows results for the same setting with "adj. none" using a non-parametric CIT.
  • Figure 4: TPR and FPR results for the setup presented in Sec. \ref{['sec:results']} without cycles in the union graph, where all links to $R$ are known (adj.$R$-all) for the methods PC-AC (our algorithm), PC-B (baseline), PC-M (masked data) and PC-P (pooled data). Results for the union graph are presented in the row above, and results for the context-specific graphs averaged over contexts are presented in the row below.
  • Figure 5: Edgemark precision (prec.) and recall (rec.) results for the setup presented in Sec. \ref{['sec:results']} without cycles in the union graph, where either all links to $R$ are known (adj. $R$-all, dotted line), only the children of $R$ are known (adj. $R$-ch, interrupted line) or no links are known (adj. none, straight line). Here, we present results for the followinf methods: PC-AC (our algorithm), PC-B (baseline), PC-M (PC with masking) and PC-P (PC on pooled data). Results for the union graph are presented in the row above, and results for the context-specific graphs, averaged over contexts, are presented in the row below.
  • ...and 7 more figures

Theorems & Definitions (44)

  • Example 3.1
  • Example 3.2
  • Lemma 4.1
  • Remark 4.1
  • Lemma 4.2
  • Theorem 1
  • Definition C.1
  • Remark C.1
  • Example C.1
  • Definition C.2
  • ...and 34 more