mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Grounding Before Generalizing: How AI Differs from Humans in Causal Transfer

arXiv 2604.24062 ↗First posted 27 Apr 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Extracting abstract causal structures and applying them to novel situations is a hallmark of human intelligence. While Large Language Models (LLMs) and Vision Language Models (VLMs) have shown strong performance on a wide range of reasoning tasks, their capacity for interactive causal learning -- inducing latent structures through sequential exploration and transferring them across contexts -- remains uncharacterized. Human learners accomplish such transfer after minimal exposure, whereas classical Reinforcement Learning (RL) agents fail catastrophically. Whether state-of-the-art Artificial Intelligence (AI) models possess human-like mechanisms for abstract causal structure transfer is an open question. Using the OpenLock paradigm requiring sequential discovery of Common Cause (CC) and Common Effect (CE) structures, here we show that models exhibit fundamentally delayed or absent transfer: even successful models require initial environmental-specific mapping -- what we term environmental grounding -- before efficiency gains emerge, whereas humans leverage prior structural knowledge from the very first solution attempt. In the text-only condition, models matched or exceeded human discovery efficiency. In contrast, visual information -- in both the image-only and text-and-image conditions -- overall degraded rather than enhanced performance, revealing a broad reliance on symbolic processing rather than integrated multimodal reasoning. Models further exhibited systematic CC/CE asymmetries absent in humans, suggesting heuristic biases rather than direction-neutral causal abstraction. These findings reveal that large-scale statistical learning does not produce the decontextualized causal schemas underpinning human analogical reasoning, establishing grounding-dependent transfer as a fundamental limitation of current LLMs and VLMs.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Apr 2026.

Builds on

10 of 27 references.

References · 10

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  2. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
  3. 2022Rethinking the Role of Demonstrations: What Makes In-Context Learning Work?cited by 1,434
  4. 2025DeepSeek-V3.2: Pushing the Frontier of Open Large Language Modelscited by 815
  5. 2023Causal Reasoning and Large Language Models: Opening a New Frontier for Causalitycited by 353
  6. 2025Towards Large Reasoning Models: A Survey of Reinforced Reasoning with Large Language Modelscited by 293
  7. 2023Can Large Language Models Infer Causation from Correlation?cited by 146
  8. 2023CLadder: Assessing Causal Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 107
  9. 2024Proposing and solving olympiad geometry with guided tree searchcited by 19
  10. 2019Theory-based Causal Transfer: Integrating Instance-level Induction and Abstract-level Structure Learningcited by 11

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2022Intrinsically Motivated Learning of Causal World Models
  2. 2025Unveiling Causal Reasoning in Large Language Models: Reality or Mirage?
  3. 2026Causal Retention in Interactive Agents: Interface Factorization and Selective Adaptation
  4. 2025Language Agents Mirror Human Causal Reasoning Biases. How Can We Help Them Think Like Scientists?
  5. 2024CELLO: Causal Evaluation of Large Vision-Language Models
  6. 2023Passive learning of active causal strategies in agents and language models
  7. 2026Vision-Default, Prior-Override: Causal Mechanisms of Perception-Knowledge Conflict in Vision-Language Models
  8. 2026Human Adults and LLMs as Scientists: Who Benefits from Active Exploration?