mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Interventional Causal Circuits for Safe Robot Action Testing and Failure Recovery

arXiv 2607.14826 ↗First posted 16 Jul 2026cs.RO cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Safe physical AI for robot actions are required not only likely to succeed but tested to be safe before execution. In practice, however, formal testing of motion parameters is computationally expensive, and the cost scales poorly with the dimensionality of the action space. When a proposed action is rejected by a tester, the naive response is to resample blindly until a passing candidate is found. This is wasteful, uninformative, and offers no convergence. We argue that rejection should instead trigger causal diagnosis: a principled identification of which action parameter caused the failure and what corrective value maximises the probability of passing testing under the interventional probability distribution. We propose a closed-loop framework that couples a Joint Probability Tree (JPT) with a Causal Circuit derived from a Marginal-Deterministic Variable Tree, enabling exact polytime computation without retraining, or additional data collection. The framework validates tractability of all interventional queries before the robot begins operating, and out-of-support candidates are detected and excluded from correction automatically. We perform experiments in a ROS2 simulation environment, and the framework demonstrates complementary roles across quality of distribution: under a high-quality JPT, the Causal Circuit reduces failed attempts by 10.3% and under a degraded JPT, it reduces total failed attempts by 37%. Every rejected plan produces a structured, interpretable causal report naming the primary cause variable, its observed value, and the recommended corrective region, supporting operator oversight and autonomous recovery without a separately trained failure model.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Jul 2026.

Builds on

15 of 29 references.

References · 15

  1. 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,642
  2. 2020Integrated Task and Motion Planningcited by 290
  3. 2020CausalWorld: A Robotic Manipulation Benchmark for Causal Structure and Transfer Learningcited by 109
  4. 2017Learning Sampling Distributions for Robot Motion Planningcited by 82
  5. 2024RePLan: Robotic Replanning with Perception and Language Modelscited by 41
  6. 2022Motion Planning around Obstacles with Convex Optimizationcited by 27
  7. 2021Interventional Sum-Product Networks: Causal Inference with Tractable Probabilistic Modelscited by 22
  8. 2021Causal Reasoning in Simulation for Structure and Transfer Learning of Robot Manipulation Policiescited by 22
  9. 2023Sampling-Based Motion Planning: A Comparative Reviewcited by 21
  10. 2024Recover: A Neuro-Symbolic Framework for Failure Detection and Recoverycited by 15
  11. 2025Diagnose, Correct, and Learn from Manipulation Failures via Visual Symbolscited by 14
  12. 2023Compositional Probabilistic and Causal Inference using Tractable Circuit Modelscited by 10
3 more
  1. 2025A Unified Framework for Real-Time Failure Handling in Robotics Using Vision-Language Models, Reactive Planner and Behavior Treescited by 4
  2. 2024Learning to Recover from Plan Execution Errors during Robot Manipulation: A Neuro-symbolic Approachcited by 3
  3. 2023Joint Probability Treescited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.