# Your Assumed DAG is Wrong and Here's How To Deal With It

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.17030 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.17030/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 46 of its 102 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 24 Feb 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 46)

- [Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.11239/) (2020)
- [PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.01703/) (2019)
- [Flow Matching for Generative Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.02747/) (2022)
- [Categorical Reparameterization with Gumbel-Softmax](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1611.01144/) (2016)
- [Normalizing Flows for Probabilistic Modeling and Inference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.02762/) (2019)
- [DAGs with NO TEARS: Continuous Optimization for Structure Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.01422/) (2018)
- [Causal Effect Inference with Deep Latent-Variable Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.08821/) (2017)
- [Causal Discovery with Continuous Additive Noise Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1309.6779/) (2013)
- [Differentiable Causal Discovery from Interventional Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.01754/) (2020)
- [D'ya like DAGs? A Survey on Structure Learning and Causal Discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.02582/) (2021)
- [Causality matters in medical imaging](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.08142/) (2019)
- [Causal Inference in the Presence of Latent Variables and Selection Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1302.4983/) (2013)
- [Beware of the Simulated DAG! Causal Discovery Benchmarks May Be Easy To Game](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.13647/) (2021)
- [DAGMA: Learning DAGs via M-matrices and a Log-Determinant Acyclicity Characterization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.08037/) (2022)
- [Causal-learn: Causal Discovery in Python](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.16405/) (2023)
- [Causal machine learning for predicting treatment outcomes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.08770/) (2024)
- [Causal Machine Learning for Healthcare and Precision Medicine](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11402/) (2022)
- [DAGs with No Fears: A Closer Look at Continuous Optimization for Learning Bayesian Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.09133/) (2020)
- [Causal Discovery with Language Models as Imperfect Experts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.02390/) (2023)
- [Identifying Causal-Effect Inference Failure with Uncertainty-Aware Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.00163/) (2020)
- [Quantifying Ignorance in Individual-Level Causal-Effect Estimates under Hidden Confounding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.04850/) (2021)
- [Differentiable DAG Sampling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.08509/) (2022)
- [Scalable Causal Discovery with Score Matching](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.03382/) (2023)
- [An Automated Approach to Causal Inference in Discrete Settings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.13471/) (2021)
- [The State of Applied Econometrics - Causality and Policy Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1607.00699/) (2016)
- [Causal Effect Identification in Cluster DAGs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.12263/) (2022)
- [A Class of Algorithms for General Instrumental Variable Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.06366/) (2020)
- [Causal Inference Under Interference And Network Uncertainty](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.00221/) (2019)
- [Stochastic Causal Programming for Bounding Treatment Effects](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.10806/) (2022)
- [Sharp Bounds for Generalized Causal Sensitivity Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.16988/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Linear-LLM-SCM: Benchmarking LLMs for Coefficient Elicitation in Linear-Gaussian Causal Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.10282/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Assuming a directed acyclic graph (DAG) that represents prior knowledge of causal relationships between variables is a common starting point for cause-effect estimation. Existing literature typically invokes hypothetical domain expert knowledge or causal discovery algorithms to justify this assumption. In practice, neither may propose a single DAG with high confidence. Domain experts are hesitant to rule out dependencies with certainty or have ongoing disputes about relationships; causal discovery often relies on untestable assumptions itself or only provides an equivalence class of DAGs and is commonly sensitive to hyperparameter and threshold choices. We propose an efficient, gradient-based optimization method that provides bounds for causal queries over a collection of causal graphs -- compatible with imperfect prior knowledge -- that may still be too large for exhaustive enumeration. Our bounds achieve good coverage and sharpness for causal queries such as average treatment effects in linear and non-linear synthetic settings as well as on real-world data. Our approach aims at providing an easy-to-use and widely applicable rebuttal to the valid critique of `What if your assumed DAG is wrong?'.