Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Patrick Blöbaum

Publications and source records attributed to Patrick Blöbaum.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
arXiv2026

A Unified Approach to Interpretable Causal Root Cause Attribution

Understanding why a target metric changes is a fundamental problem in data-driven decision making, beyond anomaly detection alone. We study root cause attribution for metric changes in complex e-commerce systems, focusing on trade-offs between interpretability, efficiency, and causal validity. As a starting point, we extend a metric-decomposition method into a recursive metric-tree framework for multi-level root cause analysis, but this relies on independence and decomposability assumptions that miss complex causal dependencies. In contrast, graphical causal models (GCMs) relax these assumptions and improve causal validity, at the cost of interpretability, higher computational and data demands, and potential attribution target misalignment. Through real-world applications, mathematical proofs, and simulations, we characterize the fundamental sources of these trade-offs. Guided by these insights, we propose a unified, causally informed attribution approach that integrates structural causal information into the metric-tree decomposition framework and corrects key sources of misalignment in GCM-based causal attributions, substantially improving causal validity while preserving interpretability and fast computation. Analytical proofs and simulations demonstrate that the proposed approach produces more accurate root cause attributions, and we also present a real-world application.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

FoundCause: Causal Discovery with Latent Confounders from Observational Data

Causal discovery from observational data remains challenging due to the need to recover directed structure and latent confounding without interventions. We propose FoundCause, an amortized causal discovery model trained entirely on synthetic data that maps datasets directly to causal graphs in a single forward pass. By learning from large collections of simulated structural causal models, FoundCause captures transferable statistical patterns that generalize beyond individual datasets. The architecture incorporates several key inductive biases for causal discovery. It uses a permutation-invariant transformer encoder with alternating attention over samples and variables to jointly model cross-variable dependence and per-variable distributions. Pairwise statistical features derived from classical asymmetry measures are injected through statistics-conditioned attention, guiding the model toward known causal signals. A factorized decoder separates edge existence from direction, while a triangular refinement module enables reasoning over higher-order causal motifs such as chains and colliders. In addition, a dedicated confounder module based on learnable latent tokens explicitly models hidden common causes, and the model explicitly handles missing data via its masked input representation. To our knowledge, FoundCause is the first amortized causal discovery approach to explicitly model latent confounding. FoundCause outperforms 11 classical non-amortized methods (e.g., PC, GES, NOTEARS-style optimization) and 4 amortized causal discovery methods on 15 real-world datasets, achieving +9.6% improvement in $F_1$, +1.2% in AUROC, and an 18.9% reduction in structural Hamming distance relative to the strongest non-amortized methods, while performing inference in a single forward pass.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2025

Debiasing Reward Models by Representation Learning with Guarantees

Recent alignment techniques, such as reinforcement learning from human feedback, have been widely adopted to align large language models with human preferences by learning and leveraging reward models. In practice, these models often exploit spurious correlations, involving, e.g., response length, discrimination, sycophancy, and conceptual bias, which is a problem that has received increasing attention. In this work, we propose a principled framework that mitigates these biases in reward models while preserving the underlying factors that reflect intended preferences. We first provide a formulation of the data-generating process, assuming that the observed data (e.g., text) is generated from both spurious and non-spurious latent variables. We show that, interestingly, these non-spurious latent variables can be theoretically identified from data, regardless of whether a surrogate for the spurious latent variables is available. This further inspires a practical method that uses variational inference to recover these variables and leverages them to train reward models. Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate that our method effectively mitigates spurious correlation issues and yields more robust reward models.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2025

From Guess2Graph: When and How Can Unreliable Experts Safely Boost Causal Discovery in Finite Samples?

Causal discovery algorithms often perform poorly with limited samples. While integrating expert knowledge (including from LLMs) as constraints promises to improve performance, guarantees for existing methods require perfect predictions or uncertainty estimates, making them unreliable for practical use. We propose the Guess2Graph (G2G) framework, which uses expert guesses to guide the sequence of statistical tests rather than replacing them. This maintains statistical consistency while enabling performance improvements. We develop two instantiations of G2G: PC-Guess, which augments the PC algorithm, and gPC-Guess, a learning-augmented variant designed to better leverage high-quality expert input. Theoretically, both preserve correctness regardless of expert error, with gPC-Guess provably outperforming its non-augmented counterpart in finite samples when experts are "better than random." Empirically, both show monotonic improvement with expert accuracy, with gPC-Guess achieving significantly stronger gains.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2025

Causal vs. Anticausal merging of predictors

We study the differences arising from merging predictors in the causal and anticausal directions using the same data. In particular we study the asymmetries that arise in a simple model where we merge the predictors using one binary variable as target and two continuous variables as predictors. We use Causal Maximum Entropy (CMAXENT) as inductive bias to merge the predictors, however, we expect similar differences to hold also when we use other merging methods that take into account asymmetries between cause and effect. We show that if we observe all bivariate distributions, the CMAXENT solution reduces to a logistic regression in the causal direction and Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) in the anticausal direction. Furthermore, we study how the decision boundaries of these two solutions differ whenever we observe only some of the bivariate distributions implications for Out-Of-Variable (OOV) generalisation.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2024

Cross-validating causal discovery via Leave-One-Variable-Out

We propose a new approach to falsify causal discovery algorithms without ground truth, which is based on testing the causal model on a variable pair excluded during learning the causal model. Specifically, given data on $X, Y, \boldsymbol{Z}=X, Y, Z_1,\dots,Z_k$, we apply the causal discovery algorithm separately to the 'leave-one-out' data sets $X, \boldsymbol{Z}$ and $Y, \boldsymbol{Z}$. We demonstrate that the two resulting causal models, in the form DAGs, ADMGs, CPDAGs or PAGs, often entail conclusions on the dependencies between $X$ and $Y$ and allow to estimate $\mathbb{E}(Y\mid X=x)$ without any joint observations of $X$ and $Y$, given only the leave-one-out datasets. This estimation is called "Leave-One-Variable-Out (LOVO)" prediction. Its error can be estimated since the joint distribution $P(X, Y)$ is available, and $X$ and $Y$ have only been omitted for the purpose of falsification. We present two variants of LOVO prediction: One graphical method, which is applicable to general causal discovery algorithms, and one version tailored towards algorithms relying on specific a priori assumptions, such as linear additive noise models. Simulations indicate that the LOVO prediction error is indeed correlated with the accuracy of the causal outputs, affirming the method's effectiveness.

stat.ML↗
arXiv2024

Anytime-Valid Inference for Double/Debiased Machine Learning of Causal Parameters

Double (debiased) machine learning (DML) has seen widespread use in recent years for learning causal/structural parameters, in part due to its flexibility and adaptability to high-dimensional nuisance functions as well as its ability to avoid bias from regularization or overfitting. However, the classic double-debiased framework is only valid asymptotically for a predetermined sample size, thus lacking the flexibility of collecting more data if sharper inference is needed, or stopping data collection early if useful inferences can be made earlier than expected. This can be of particular concern in large scale experimental studies with huge financial costs or human lives at stake, as well as in observational studies where the length of confidence of intervals do not shrink to zero even with increasing sample size due to partial identifiability of a structural parameter. In this paper, we present time-uniform counterparts to the asymptotic DML results, enabling valid inference and confidence intervals for structural parameters to be constructed at any arbitrary (possibly data-dependent) stopping time. We provide conditions which are only slightly stronger than the standard DML conditions, but offer the stronger guarantee for anytime-valid inference. This facilitates the transformation of any existing DML method to provide anytime-valid guarantees with minimal modifications, making it highly adaptable and easy to use. We illustrate our procedure using two instances: a) local average treatment effect in online experiments with non-compliance, and b) partial identification of average treatment effect in observational studies with potential unmeasured confounding.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2024

Root Cause Analysis of Outliers with Missing Structural Knowledge

The goal of Root Cause Analysis (RCA) is to explain why an anomaly occurred by identifying where the fault originated. Several recent works model the anomalous event as resulting from a change in the causal mechanism at the root cause, i.e., as a soft intervention. RCA is then the task of identifying which causal mechanism changed. In real-world applications, one often has either few or only a single sample from the post-intervention distribution: a severe limitation for most methods, which assume one knows or can estimate the distribution. However, even those that do not are statistically ill-posed due to the need to probe regression models in regions of low probability density. In this paper, we propose simple, efficient methods to overcome both difficulties in the case where there is a single root cause and the causal graph is a polytree. When one knows the causal graph, we give guarantees for a traversal algorithm that requires only marginal anomaly scores and does not depend on specifying an arbitrary anomaly score cut-off. When one does not know the causal graph, we show that the heuristic of identifying root causes as the variables with the highest marginal anomaly scores is causally justified. To this end, we prove that anomalies with small scores are unlikely to cause those with larger scores in polytrees and give upper bounds for the likelihood of causal pathways with non-monotonic anomaly scores.

stat.ML↗
arXiv2023

The PetShop Dataset -- Finding Causes of Performance Issues across Microservices

Identifying root causes for unexpected or undesirable behavior in complex systems is a prevalent challenge. This issue becomes especially crucial in modern cloud applications that employ numerous microservices. Although the machine learning and systems research communities have proposed various techniques to tackle this problem, there is currently a lack of standardized datasets for quantitative benchmarking. Consequently, research groups are compelled to create their own datasets for experimentation. This paper introduces a dataset specifically designed for evaluating root cause analyses in microservice-based applications. The dataset encompasses latency, requests, and availability metrics emitted in 5-minute intervals from a distributed application. In addition to normal operation metrics, the dataset includes 68 injected performance issues, which increase latency and reduce availability throughout the system. We showcase how this dataset can be used to evaluate the accuracy of a variety of methods spanning different causal and non-causal characterisations of the root cause analysis problem. We hope the new dataset, available at https://github.com/amazon-science/petshop-root-cause-analysis/ enables further development of techniques in this important area.

cs.DC↗
arXiv2023

Beyond Single-Feature Importance with ICECREAM

Which set of features was responsible for a certain output of a machine learning model? Which components caused the failure of a cloud computing application? These are just two examples of questions we are addressing in this work by Identifying Coalition-based Explanations for Common and Rare Events in Any Model (ICECREAM). Specifically, we propose an information-theoretic quantitative measure for the influence of a coalition of variables on the distribution of a target variable. This allows us to identify which set of factors is essential to obtain a certain outcome, as opposed to well-established explainability and causal contribution analysis methods which can assign contributions only to individual factors and rank them by their importance. In experiments with synthetic and real-world data, we show that ICECREAM outperforms state-of-the-art methods for explainability and root cause analysis, and achieves impressive accuracy in both tasks.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

Toward Falsifying Causal Graphs Using a Permutation-Based Test

Understanding causal relationships among the variables of a system is paramount to explain and control its behavior. For many real-world systems, however, the true causal graph is not readily available and one must resort to predictions made by algorithms or domain experts. Therefore, metrics that quantitatively assess the goodness of a causal graph provide helpful checks before using it in downstream tasks. Existing metrics provide an $\textit{absolute}$ number of inconsistencies between the graph and the observed data, and without a baseline, practitioners are left to answer the hard question of how many such inconsistencies are acceptable or expected. Here, we propose a novel consistency metric by constructing a baseline through node permutations. By comparing the number of inconsistencies with those on the baseline, we derive an interpretable metric that captures whether the graph is significantly better than random. Evaluating on both simulated and real data sets from various domains, including biology and cloud monitoring, we demonstrate that the true graph is not falsified by our metric, whereas the wrong graphs given by a hypothetical user are likely to be falsified.

stat.ML↗
arXiv2023

Modeling Causal Mechanisms with Diffusion Models for Interventional and Counterfactual Queries

We consider the problem of answering observational, interventional, and counterfactual queries in a causally sufficient setting where only observational data and the causal graph are available. Utilizing the recent developments in diffusion models, we introduce diffusion-based causal models (DCM) to learn causal mechanisms, that generate unique latent encodings. These encodings enable us to directly sample under interventions and perform abduction for counterfactuals. Diffusion models are a natural fit here, since they can encode each node to a latent representation that acts as a proxy for exogenous noise. Our empirical evaluations demonstrate significant improvements over existing state-of-the-art methods for answering causal queries. Furthermore, we provide theoretical results that offer a methodology for analyzing counterfactual estimation in general encoder-decoder models, which could be useful in settings beyond our proposed approach.

stat.ML↗
arXiv2023

Thompson Sampling with Diffusion Generative Prior

In this work, we initiate the idea of using denoising diffusion models to learn priors for online decision making problems. Our special focus is on the meta-learning for bandit framework, with the goal of learning a strategy that performs well across bandit tasks of a same class. To this end, we train a diffusion model that learns the underlying task distribution and combine Thompson sampling with the learned prior to deal with new tasks at test time. Our posterior sampling algorithm is designed to carefully balance between the learned prior and the noisy observations that come from the learner's interaction with the environment. To capture realistic bandit scenarios, we also propose a novel diffusion model training procedure that trains even from incomplete and/or noisy data, which could be of independent interest. Finally, our extensive experimental evaluations clearly demonstrate the potential of the proposed approach.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

Manifold Restricted Interventional Shapley Values

Shapley values are model-agnostic methods for explaining model predictions. Many commonly used methods of computing Shapley values, known as off-manifold methods, rely on model evaluations on out-of-distribution input samples. Consequently, explanations obtained are sensitive to model behaviour outside the data distribution, which may be irrelevant for all practical purposes. While on-manifold methods have been proposed which do not suffer from this problem, we show that such methods are overly dependent on the input data distribution, and therefore result in unintuitive and misleading explanations. To circumvent these problems, we propose ManifoldShap, which respects the model's domain of validity by restricting model evaluations to the data manifold. We show, theoretically and empirically, that ManifoldShap is robust to off-manifold perturbations of the model and leads to more accurate and intuitive explanations than existing state-of-the-art Shapley methods.

stat.ML↗
arXiv2022

Sequential Kernelized Independence Testing

Independence testing is a classical statistical problem that has been extensively studied in the batch setting when one fixes the sample size before collecting data. However, practitioners often prefer procedures that adapt to the complexity of a problem at hand instead of setting sample size in advance. Ideally, such procedures should (a) stop earlier on easy tasks (and later on harder tasks), hence making better use of available resources, and (b) continuously monitor the data and efficiently incorporate statistical evidence after collecting new data, while controlling the false alarm rate. Classical batch tests are not tailored for streaming data: valid inference after data peeking requires correcting for multiple testing which results in low power. Following the principle of testing by betting, we design sequential kernelized independence tests that overcome such shortcomings. We exemplify our broad framework using bets inspired by kernelized dependence measures, e.g., the Hilbert-Schmidt independence criterion. Our test is also valid under non-i.i.d., time-varying settings. We demonstrate the power of our approaches on both simulated and real data.

stat.ML↗
arXiv2022

DoWhy-GCM: An extension of DoWhy for causal inference in graphical causal models

We present DoWhy-GCM, an extension of the DoWhy Python library, which leverages graphical causal models. Unlike existing causality libraries, which mainly focus on effect estimation, DoWhy-GCM addresses diverse causal queries, such as identifying the root causes of outliers and distributional changes, attributing causal influences to the data generating process of each node, or diagnosis of causal structures. With DoWhy-GCM, users typically specify cause-effect relations via a causal graph, fit causal mechanisms, and pose causal queries -- all with just a few lines of code. The general documentation is available at https://www.pywhy.org/dowhy and the DoWhy-GCM specific code at https://github.com/py-why/dowhy/tree/main/dowhy/gcm.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2020

Quantifying intrinsic causal contributions via structure preserving interventions

We propose a notion of causal influence that describes the `intrinsic' part of the contribution of a node on a target node in a DAG. By recursively writing each node as a function of the upstream noise terms, we separate the intrinsic information added by each node from the one obtained from its ancestors. To interpret the intrinsic information as a {\it causal} contribution, we consider `structure-preserving interventions' that randomize each node in a way that mimics the usual dependence on the parents and does not perturb the observed joint distribution. To get a measure that is invariant with respect to relabelling nodes we use Shapley based symmetrization and show that it reduces in the linear case to simple ANOVA after resolving the target node into noise variables. We describe our contribution analysis for variance and entropy, but contributions for other target metrics can be defined analogously. The code is available in the package gcm of the open source library DoWhy.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2019

Causal structure based root cause analysis of outliers

We describe a formal approach to identify 'root causes' of outliers observed in $n$ variables $X_1,\dots,X_n$ in a scenario where the causal relation between the variables is a known directed acyclic graph (DAG). To this end, we first introduce a systematic way to define outlier scores. Further, we introduce the concept of 'conditional outlier score' which measures whether a value of some variable is unexpected *given the value of its parents* in the DAG, if one were to assume that the causal structure and the corresponding conditional distributions are also valid for the anomaly. Finally, we quantify to what extent the high outlier score of some target variable can be attributed to outliers of its ancestors. This quantification is defined via Shapley values from cooperative game theory.

stat.ML↗