mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

EML-CD: Causal Mechanism Recovery via EML Symbolic Trees in Structure Learning

arXiv 2606.05942 ↗First posted 4 Jun 2026stat.ML cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Neural network (NN)-based nonlinear causal discovery methods recover DAG structure but leave each causal mechanism as a black box. Waxman et al. argued that extracting causal mechanisms from NN weights is ill-posed. We propose EML-CD, a framework that integrates the EML operator (capable of composing elementary functions from a single binary operator) into causal structure learning, with interpretable mechanism recovery as the primary objective. EML-CD represents each edge mechanism as a gated EML binary tree and automatically discovers closed-form causal equations. Analytical Jacobians can be directly computed from the output equations, enabling quantitative understanding of causal effects. On real data (Sachs protein signaling, d=11), EML-CD achieves SHD=11.2 +/- 0.4 (5-seed mean; baselines are single deterministic runs), on par with PC/GES within seed variance and below CAM, while attaching closed-form equations to each detected edge (precision 0.756, recall 0.365). In a controlled bivariate test with known mechanisms, EML-CD recovers 10 of 11 elementary function families faithfully (held-out shape correlation >= 0.96; only high-frequency sine is partial). On a symbolic synthetic benchmark, EML-CD attains a substantially lower and more stable held-out mechanism f-MSE than a fixed SINDy dictionary (mean 3.67 vs. 7644, the latter inflated by catastrophic extrapolation on one seed), although its structure recovery (SHD 14.0) only matches the dictionary and stays below specialized optimizers; on the Causal Chambers light-tunnel subset, a depth-2 model improves F1 over linear OLS-BIC (0.444 vs. 0.273).

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Jun 2026.

Builds on

17 of 25 references.

References · 17

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  2. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
  3. 2018DAGs with NO TEARS: Continuous Optimization for Structure Learningcited by 752
  4. 2020Discovering Symbolic Models from Deep Learning with Inductive Biasescited by 344
  5. 2013Causal Discovery with Continuous Additive Noise Modelscited by 255
  6. 2019Gradient-Based Neural DAG Learningcited by 227
  7. 2019Learning Sparse Nonparametric DAGscited by 207
  8. 2020On the Role of Sparsity and DAG Constraints for Learning Linear DAGscited by 191
  9. 2013CAM: Causal additive models, high-dimensional order search and penalized regressioncited by 178
  10. 2022DAGMA: Learning DAGs via M-matrices and a Log-Determinant Acyclicity Characterizationcited by 140
  11. 2021DiBS: Differentiable Bayesian Structure Learningcited by 106
  12. 2024The Landscape of Causal Discovery Data: Grounding Causal Discovery in Real-World Applicationscited by 18
5 more
  1. 2024Dagma-DCE: Interpretable, Non-Parametric Differentiable Causal Discoverycited by 6
  2. 2026All elementary functions from a single binary operatorcited by 5
  3. 2025Differentiable Constraint-Based Causal Discoverycited by 4
  4. 2025Scalable Causal Discovery from Recursive Nonlinear Data via Truncated Basis Function Scores and Testscited by 1
  5. 2026Bivariate Causal Discovery Using Rate-Distortion MDL: An Information Dimension Approachcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.