Causal Representation Learning Made Identifiable by Grouping of Observational Variables
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A topic of great current interest is Causal Representation Learning (CRL), whose goal is to learn a causal model for hidden features in a data-driven manner. Unfortunately, CRL is severely ill-posed since it is a combination of the two notoriously ill-posed problems of representation learning and causal discovery. Yet, finding practical identifiability conditions that guarantee a unique solution is crucial for its practical applicability. Most approaches so far have been based on assumptions on the latent causal mechanisms, such as temporal causality, or existence of supervision or interventions; these can be too restrictive in actual applications. Here, we show identifiability based on novel, weak constraints, which requires no temporal structure, intervention, nor weak supervision. The approach is based on assuming the observational mixing exhibits a suitable grouping of the observational variables. We also propose a novel self-supervised estimation framework consistent with the model, prove its statistical consistency, and experimentally show its superior CRL performances compared to the state-of-the-art baselines. We further demonstrate its robustness against latent confounders and causal cycles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".