arXiv subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Ricardo Silva.
We propose doubly robust adaptive conformal inference (DR-ACI), which constructs prediction intervals for doubly robust pseudo-outcomes under temporal dependence.
The instrumental-variables (IV) setting is standard for partial identification of causal effects when unobserved confounding makes point identification impossible. Existing approaches face methodological bottlenecks: closed-form bound estimands are required -- e.g., Balke-Pearl equations in binary IV -- and even when available, designing accurate estimators requires manual effort tailored to each estimand. While direct Bayesian inference of the causal effects, instead of the bounds, circumvents these challenges, it is often computationally intensive and suffers from high prior sensitivity or under-dispersed posteriors. As a remedy, we introduce IV-ICL, an amortized Bayesian in-context learning method that learns the marginal posterior distribution of the causal effects directly and derives bounds as its quantiles. Unlike standard variational inference that optimizes exclusive KL divergence, amortized Bayesian inference minimizes the expected inclusive KL, a mass-covering objective. We empirically observe that optimizing inclusive KL can recover the entire identified set across diverse data-generating processes, while exclusive-KL (e.g. with variational inference) of the same Bayesian formulation collapses onto a single mode and fails to cover the identified set. We evaluate IV-ICL on synthetic and semi-synthetic IV benchmarks and show it produces intervals that are more reliably valid and more informative compared to efficient semi-parametric, Bayesian, and plug-in baselines, at 20-500x lower inference time. Beyond methodology, we propose a procedure to convert randomized controlled trials into IV benchmarks with provably preserved ground-truth causal effects that enables a more realistic evaluation of partial-identification methods.
In routine care, individuals identified a priori as high-risk are usually tested for conditions more frequently. Protected attributes, such as sex or ethnicity may also determine testing frequency. Such heterogeneous detection rates across a population induce label error. This causes systematic model error for specific groups and biases performance metrics during validation. This paper proposes a method to correct for such bias in prediction models due to differential diagnostic delay. We use a causal inference framework to define our target estimand: an individual's diagnosis probability in a counterfactual scenario where their diagnosis rate matches that of a reference group. We model the longitudinal process as a hidden Markov model, in which confirmatory test results are emissions from a latent progressive disease stage. We validate our approach in simulated data and apply it to a case study of chronic kidney disease prediction using electronic health records. In simulations, our method reduces prediction bias and improves calibration-in-the-large, correcting the Observed:Expected ratio in the underdiagnosed group from 1.34 (standard deviation: 0.09) in a model developed without any correction for underdiagnosis bias to 1.02 (0.09). Violations of assumptions in the simulation affected the estimation of model parameters, but the proposed approach nonetheless remained better calibrated than the standard model. In the clinical case study, we identify diabetes as the main driver of observability, with an odds ratio of 10.36 (95% confidence interval, 9.80 - 11.02) in 6-month urine albumin-creatinine ratio testing rate. Using our approach to predict the counterfactual diagnostic rate in patients without diabetes, we improved the Observed:Expected ratio of a developed clinical prediction model from 1.55 (1.51 - 1.59) to 1.01 (0.98 - 1.04).
Developing predictive models that perform reliably across diverse patient populations and heterogeneous environments is a core aim of medical research. However, generalization is only possible if the learned model is robust to statistical differences between data used for training and data seen at the time and place of deployment. Domain generalization methods provide strategies to address data shifts, but each method comes with its own set of assumptions and trade-offs. To apply these methods in healthcare, we must understand how domain shifts arise, what assumptions we prefer to make, and what our design constraints are. This article proposes a causal framework for the design of predictive models to improve generalization. Causality provides a powerful language to characterize and understand diverse domain shifts, regardless of data modality. This allows us to pinpoint why models fail to generalize, leading to more principled strategies to prepare for and adapt to shifts. We recommend general mitigation strategies, discussing trade-offs and highlighting existing work. Our causality-based perspective offers a critical foundation for developing robust, interpretable, and clinically relevant AI solutions in healthcare, paving the way for reliable real-world deployment.
While randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for estimating causal treatment effects, their limited sample sizes and restrictive criteria make it difficult to extrapolate to a broader population. Observational data, while larger, suffer from unmeasured confounding. Therefore, we can combine the strengths of both data sources for more accurate results. This work extends existing methods that use RCTs to debias conditional average treatment effects (CATEs) estimated in observational data by defining a deconfounding function. Our proposed approach borrows information from RCTs of multiple related treatments to improve the extrapolation of CATEs. Simulation results showed that, for non-linear deconfounding functions, using only one RCT poorly estimates the CATE outside of the support of that RCT. This is emphasised for smaller RCTs. Borrowing information from a second RCT provided more accurate estimates of the CATE outside of the support of both RCTs.
The promise that causal modelling can lead to robust AI generalization has been challenged in recent work on domain generalization (DG) benchmarks. We revisit the claims of the causality and DG literature, reconciling apparent contradictions and advocating for a more nuanced theory of the role of causality in generalization. We also provide an interactive demo at https://chai-uk.github.io/ukairs25-causal-predictors/.
Instrumental variables (IVs) are widely used to estimate causal effects in the presence of unobserved confounding between exposure and outcome. An IV must affect the outcome exclusively through the exposure and be unconfounded with the outcome. We present a framework for relaxing either or both of these strong assumptions with tuneable and interpretable budget constraints. Our algorithm returns a feasible set of causal effects that can be identified exactly given relevant covariance parameters. The feasible set may be disconnected but is a finite union of convex subsets. We discuss conditions under which this set is sharp, i.e., contains all and only effects consistent with the background assumptions and the joint distribution of observable variables. Our method applies to a wide class of semiparametric models, and we demonstrate how its ability to select specific subsets of instruments confers an advantage over convex relaxations in both linear and nonlinear settings. We also adapt our algorithm to form confidence sets that are asymptotically valid under a common statistical assumption from the Mendelian randomization literature.
Fine-tuning foundation models often compromises their robustness to distribution shifts. To remedy this, most robust fine-tuning methods aim to preserve the pre-trained features. However, not all pre-trained features are robust and those methods are largely indifferent to which ones to preserve. We propose dual risk minimization (DRM), which combines empirical risk minimization with worst-case risk minimization, to better preserve the core features of downstream tasks. In particular, we utilize core-feature descriptions generated by LLMs to induce core-based zero-shot predictions which then serve as proxies to estimate the worst-case risk. DRM balances two crucial aspects of model robustness: expected performance and worst-case performance, establishing a new state of the art on various real-world benchmarks. DRM significantly improves the out-of-distribution performance of CLIP ViT-L/14@336 on ImageNet (75.9 to 77.1), WILDS-iWildCam (47.1 to 51.8), and WILDS-FMoW (50.7 to 53.1); opening up new avenues for robust fine-tuning. Our code is available at https://github.com/vaynexie/DRM .
We consider sequential treatment regimes where each unit is exposed to combinations of interventions over time. When interventions are described by qualitative labels, such as "close schools for a month due to a pandemic" or "promote this podcast to this user during this week", it is unclear which appropriate structural assumptions allow us to generalize behavioral predictions to previously unseen combinations of interventions. Standard black-box approaches mapping sequences of categorical variables to outputs are applicable, but they rely on poorly understood assumptions on how reliable generalization can be obtained, and may underperform under sparse sequences, temporal variability, and large action spaces. To approach that, we pose an explicit model for composition, that is, how the effect of sequential interventions can be isolated into modules, clarifying which data conditions allow for the identification of their combined effect at different units and time steps. We show the identification properties of our compositional model, inspired by advances in causal matrix factorization methods. Our focus is on predictive models for novel compositions of interventions instead of matrix completion tasks and causal effect estimation. We compare our approach to flexible but generic black-box models to illustrate how structure aids prediction in sparse data conditions.
Adapting to latent confounded shift remains a core challenge in modern AI. This setting is driven by hidden variables that induce spurious correlations between inputs and outputs during training, leading models to rely on non-causal shortcuts. For example, a model may learn to treat metadata (e.g., data source like "Amazon") as a proxy for positive sentiment, causing failure when the source becomes predominantly negative during deployment. To address this latent confounded shift, we introduce Causal Fine-Tuning(CFT). Using a structural causal model as an inductive bias, we derive sufficient identification conditions that motivate a fine-tuning objective for decomposing representations into high-level stable and low-level shift-sensitive components. Instantiating this framework in BERT, we show that learning such causal/spurious representations and adjusting them accordingly yield a more robust predictor. Experiments on spurious correlation injection attacks in text demonstrate that our method outperforms black-box domain generalization baselines, highlighting the benefits of explicitly modeling causal structure.
Field-Effect Transistors with graphene channels or GFETs are an interesting alternative for the detection of analytes in biological fluids since the electrical behavior of the channel changes when exposed to a sample (among other detection strategies). In this work a preliminary characterization is made in terms of the resistance of the channel for a commercial device that has GFETs of 1 and 3 channels for cases of dry and wet gate at atmospheric pressure. The channel resistance was obtained by sweeping the drain-source voltage from -1 to +1V and measuring the drain current in a test station developed for this purpose, for gate cases with and without a PBS 0.001X reference solution. The ohmic response of the channel is linear current with respect to voltage, being greater resistance in the case of wet gate. An increase in resistance with respect to voltage was observed that it is important to review. It was possible to make the ohmic characterization of the channel and a series of recommendations are suggested to continue this research.
Instrumental variables (IVs) are a popular and powerful tool for estimating causal effects in the presence of unobserved confounding. However, classical approaches rely on strong assumptions such as the $\textit{exclusion criterion}$, which states that instrumental effects must be entirely mediated by treatments. This assumption often fails in practice. When IV methods are improperly applied to data that do not meet the exclusion criterion, estimated causal effects may be badly biased. In this work, we propose a novel solution that provides $\textit{partial}$ identification in linear systems given a set of $\textit{leaky instruments}$, which are allowed to violate the exclusion criterion to some limited degree. We derive a convex optimization objective that provides provably sharp bounds on the average treatment effect under some common forms of information leakage, and implement inference procedures to quantify the uncertainty of resulting estimates. We demonstrate our method in a set of experiments with simulated data, where it performs favorably against the state of the art. An accompanying $\texttt{R}$ package, $\texttt{leakyIV}$, is available from $\texttt{CRAN}$.
Blanket statements of equivalence between causal concepts and purely probabilistic concepts should be approached with care. In this short note, I examine a recent claim that counterfactual fairness is equivalent to demographic parity. The claim fails to hold up upon closer examination. I will take the opportunity to address some broader misunderstandings about counterfactual fairness.
One of the goals of causal inference is to generalize from past experiments and observational data to novel conditions. While it is in principle possible to eventually learn a mapping from a novel experimental condition to an outcome of interest, provided a sufficient variety of experiments is available in the training data, coping with a large combinatorial space of possible interventions is hard. Under a typical sparse experimental design, this mapping is ill-posed without relying on heavy regularization or prior distributions. Such assumptions may or may not be reliable, and can be hard to defend or test. In this paper, we take a close look at how to warrant a leap from past experiments to novel conditions based on minimal assumptions about the factorization of the distribution of the manipulated system, communicated in the well-understood language of factor graph models. A postulated $\textit{interventional factor model}$ (IFM) may not always be informative, but it conveniently abstracts away a need for explicitly modeling unmeasured confounding and feedback mechanisms, leading to directly testable claims. Given an IFM and datasets from a collection of experimental regimes, we derive conditions for identifiability of the expected outcomes of new regimes never observed in these training data. We implement our framework using several efficient algorithms, and apply them on a range of semi-synthetic experiments.
The problem of spurious correlations (SCs) arises when a classifier relies on non-predictive features that happen to be correlated with the labels in the training data. For example, a classifier may misclassify dog breeds based on the background of dog images. This happens when the backgrounds are correlated with other breeds in the training data, leading to misclassifications during test time. Previous SC benchmark datasets suffer from varying issues, e.g., over-saturation or only containing one-to-one (O2O) SCs, but no many-to-many (M2M) SCs arising between groups of spurious attributes and classes. In this paper, we present \benchmark-\{O2O, M2M\}-\{Easy, Medium, Hard\}, an image classification benchmark suite containing spurious correlations between classes and backgrounds. To create this dataset, we employ a text-to-image model to generate photo-realistic images and an image captioning model to filter out unsuitable ones. The resulting dataset is of high quality and contains approximately 152k images. Our experimental results demonstrate that state-of-the-art group robustness methods struggle with \benchmark, most notably on the Hard-splits with none of them getting over $70\%$ accuracy on the hardest split using a ResNet50 pretrained on ImageNet. By examining model misclassifications, we detect reliances on spurious backgrounds, demonstrating that our dataset provides a significant challenge.
Causal effect estimation is important for many tasks in the natural and social sciences. We design algorithms for the continuous partial identification problem: bounding the effects of multivariate, continuous treatments when unmeasured confounding makes identification impossible. Specifically, we cast causal effects as objective functions within a constrained optimization problem, and minimize/maximize these functions to obtain bounds. We combine flexible learning algorithms with Monte Carlo methods to implement a family of solutions under the name of stochastic causal programming. In particular, we show how the generic framework can be efficiently formulated in settings where auxiliary variables are clustered into pre-treatment and post-treatment sets, where no fine-grained causal graph can be easily specified. In these settings, we can avoid the need for fully specifying the distribution family of hidden common causes. Monte Carlo computation is also much simplified, leading to algorithms which are more computationally stable against alternatives.
We address the problem of causal effect estimation in the presence of unobserved confounding, but where proxies for the latent confounder(s) are observed. We propose two kernel-based methods for nonlinear causal effect estimation in this setting: (a) a two-stage regression approach, and (b) a maximum moment restriction approach. We focus on the proximal causal learning setting, but our methods can be used to solve a wider class of inverse problems characterised by a Fredholm integral equation. In particular, we provide a unifying view of two-stage and moment restriction approaches for solving this problem in a nonlinear setting. We provide consistency guarantees for each algorithm, and we demonstrate these approaches achieve competitive results on synthetic data and data simulating a real-world task. In particular, our approach outperforms earlier methods that are not suited to leveraging proxy variables.
We introduce a causal framework for designing optimal policies that satisfy fairness constraints. We take a pragmatic approach asking what we can do with an action space available to us and only with access to historical data. We propose two different fairness constraints: a moderation breaking constraint which aims at blocking moderation paths from the action and sensitive attribute to the outcome, and by that at reducing disparity in outcome levels as much as the provided action space permits; and an equal benefit constraint which aims at distributing gain from the new and maximized policy equally across sensitive attribute levels, and thus at keeping pre-existing preferential treatment in place or avoiding the introduction of new disparity. We introduce practical methods for implementing the constraints and illustrate their uses on experiments with semi-synthetic models.