mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Comparative Benchmarking of Causal Discovery Techniques

arXiv 1708.06246 ↗First posted 18 Aug 2017cs.AI stat.MLcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In this paper we present a comprehensive view of prominent causal discovery algorithms, categorized into two main categories (1) assuming acyclic and no latent variables, and (2) allowing both cycles and latent variables, along with experimental results comparing them from three perspectives: (a) structural accuracy, (b) standard predictive accuracy, and (c) accuracy of counterfactual inference. For (b) and (c) we train causal Bayesian networks with structures as predicted by each causal discovery technique to carry out counterfactual or standard predictive inference. We compare causal algorithms on two pub- licly available and one simulated datasets having different sample sizes: small, medium and large. Experiments show that structural accuracy of a technique does not necessarily correlate with higher accuracy of inferencing tasks. Fur- ther, surveyed structure learning algorithms do not perform well in terms of structural accuracy in case of datasets having large number of variables.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 18 Aug 2017.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 0; 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 1.

6 papers.