Information-Theoretic Causal Discovery

It is well-known that correlation does not equal causation, but how can we infer causal relations from data? Causal discovery tries to answer precisely this question by rigorously analyzing under which assumptions it is feasible to infer causal networks from passively collected, so-called observational data. Particularly, causal discovery aims to infer a directed graph among a set of observed random variables under assumptions which are as realistic as possible. A key assumption in causal discovery is faithfulness. That is, we assume that separations in the true graph imply independencies in the distribution and vice versa. If faithfulness holds and we have access to a perfect independence oracle, traditional causal discovery approaches can infer the Markov equivalence class of the true causal graph---i.e., infer the correct undirected network and even some of the edge directions. In a real-world setting, faithfulness may be violated, however, and neither do we have access to such an independence oracle. Beyond that, we are interested in inferring the complete DAG structure and not just the Markov equivalence class. To circumvent or at least alleviate these limitations, we take an information-theoretic approach. In the first part of this thesis, we consider violations of faithfulness that can be induced by exclusive or relations or cancelling paths, and develop a weaker faithfulness assumption, called 2-adjacency faithfulness, to detect some of these mechanisms. Further, we analyze under which conditions it is possible to infer the correct DAG structure even if such violations occur. In the second part, we focus on independence testing via conditional mutual information (CMI). CMI is an information-theoretic measure of dependence based on Shannon entropy. We first suggest estimating CMI for discrete variables via normalized maximum likelihood instead of the plug-in maximum likelihood estimator that tends to overestimate dependencies. On top of that, we show that CMI can be consistently estimated for discrete-continuous mixture random variables by simply discretizing the continuous parts of each variable. Last, we consider the problem of distinguishing the two Markov equivalent graphs X to Y and Y to X, which is a necessary step towards discovering all edge directions. To solve this problem, it is inevitable to make assumptions about the generating mechanism. We build upon the idea which states that the cause is algorithmically independent of its mechanism. We propose two methods to approximate this postulate via the Minimum Description Length (MDL) principle: one for univariate numeric data and one for multivariate mixed-type data. Finally, we combine insights from our MDL-based approach and regression-based methods with strong guarantees and show we can identify cause and effect via L0-regularized regression

Learning Instrumental Variables with Structural and Non-Gaussianity Assumptions

Learning a causal effect from observational data requires strong assumptions. One possible method is to use instrumental variables, which are typically justified by background knowledge. It is possible, under further assumptions, to discover whether a variable is structurally instrumental to a target causal effect X→YX→Y. However, the few existing approaches are lacking on how general these assumptions can be, and how to express possible equivalence classes of solutions. We present instrumental variable discovery methods that systematically characterize which set of causal effects can and cannot be discovered under local graphical criteria that define instrumental variables, without reconstructing full causal graphs. We also introduce the first methods to exploit non-Gaussianity assumptions, highlighting identifiability problems and solutions. Due to the difficulty of estimating such models from finite data, we investigate how to strengthen assumptions in order to make the statistical problem more manageable

Discovering robust dependencies from data

Science revolves around forming hypotheses, designing experiments, collecting data, and tests. It was not until recently, with the advent of modern hardware and data analytics, that science shifted towards a big-data-driven paradigm that led to an unprecedented success across various fields. What is perhaps the most astounding feature of this new era, is that interesting hypotheses can now be automatically discovered from observational data. This dissertation investigates knowledge discovery procedures that do exactly this. In particular, we seek algorithms that discover the most informative models able to compactly “describe” aspects of the phenomena under investigation, in both supervised and unsupervised settings. We consider interpretable models in the form of subsets of the original variable set. We want the models to capture all possible interactions, e.g., linear, non-linear, between all types of variables, e.g., discrete, continuous, and lastly, we want their quality to be meaningfully assessed. For this, we employ information-theoretic measures, and particularly, the fraction of information for the supervised setting, and the normalized total correlation for the unsupervised. The former measures the uncertainty reduction of the target variable conditioned on a model, and the latter measures the information overlap of the variables included in a model. Without access to the true underlying data generating process, we estimate the aforementioned measures from observational data. This process is prone to statistical errors, and in our case, the errors manifest as biases towards larger models. This can lead to situations where the results are utterly random, hindering therefore further analysis. We correct this behavior with notions from statistical learning theory. In particular, we propose regularized estimators that are unbiased under the hypothesis of independence, leading to robust estimation from limited data samples and arbitrary dimensionalities. Moreover, we do this for models consisting of both discrete and continuous variables. Lastly, to discover the top scoring models, we derive effective optimization algorithms for exact, approximate, and heuristic search. These algorithms are powered by admissible, tight, and efficient-to-compute bounding functions for our proposed estimators that can be used to greatly prune the search space. Overall, the products of this dissertation can successfully assist data analysts with data exploration, discovering powerful description models, or concluding that no satisfactory models exist, implying therefore new experiments and data are required for the phenomena under investigation. This statement is supported by Materials Science researchers who corroborated our discoveries.In der Wissenschaft geht es um Hypothesenbildung, Entwerfen von Experimenten, Sammeln von Daten und Tests. Jüngst hat sich die Wissenschaft, durch das Aufkommen moderner Hardware und Datenanalyse, zu einem Big-Data-basierten Paradigma hin entwickelt, das zu einem beispiellosen Erfolg in verschiedenen Bereichen geführt hat. Ein erstaunliches Merkmal dieser neuen ra ist, dass interessante Hypothesen jetzt automatisch aus Beobachtungsdaten entdeckt werden k nnen. In dieser Dissertation werden Verfahren zur Wissensentdeckung untersucht, die genau dies tun. Insbesondere suchen wir nach Algorithmen, die Modelle identifizieren, die in der Lage sind, Aspekte der untersuchten Ph nomene sowohl in beaufsichtigten als auch in unbeaufsichtigten Szenarien kompakt zu “beschreiben”. Hierzu betrachten wir interpretierbare Modelle in Form von Untermengen der ursprünglichen Variablenmenge. Ziel ist es, dass diese Modelle alle m glichen Interaktionen erfassen (z.B. linear, nicht-lineare), zwischen allen Arten von Variablen unterscheiden (z.B. diskrete, kontinuierliche) und dass schlussendlich ihre Qualit t sinnvoll bewertet wird. Dazu setzen wir informationstheoretische Ma e ein, insbesondere den Informationsanteil für das überwachte und die normalisierte Gesamtkorrelation für das unüberwachte Szenario. Ersteres misst die Unsicherheitsreduktion der Zielvariablen, die durch ein Modell bedingt ist, und letztere misst die Informationsüberlappung der enthaltenen Variablen. Ohne Kontrolle des Datengenerierungsprozesses werden die oben genannten Ma e aus Beobachtungsdaten gesch tzt. Dies ist anf llig für statistische Fehler, die zu Verzerrungen in gr  eren Modellen führen. So entstehen Situationen, wobei die Ergebnisse v llig zuf llig sind und somit weitere Analysen st ren. Wir korrigieren dieses Verhalten mit Methoden aus der statistischen Lerntheorie. Insbesondere schlagen wir regularisierte Sch tzer vor, die unter der Hypothese der Unabh ngigkeit nicht verzerrt sind und somit zu einer robusten Sch tzung aus begrenzten Datenstichproben und willkürlichen-Dimensionalit ten führen. Darüber hinaus wenden wir dies für Modelle an, die sowohl aus diskreten als auch aus kontinuierlichen Variablen bestehen. Um die besten Modelle zu entdecken, leiten wir effektive Optimierungsalgorithmen mit verschiedenen Garantien ab. Diese Algorithmen basieren auf speziellen Begrenzungsfunktionen der vorgeschlagenen Sch tzer und erlauben es den Suchraum stark einzuschr nken. Insgesamt sind die Produkte dieser Arbeit sehr effektiv für die Wissensentdeckung. Letztere Aussage wurde von Materialwissenschaftlern best tigt

Detecting and quantifying causal associations in large nonlinear time series datasets

Identifying causal relationships and quantifying their strength from observational time series data are key problems in disciplines dealing with complex dynamical systems such as the Earth system or the human body. Data-driven causal inference in such systems is challenging since datasets are often high dimensional and nonlinear with limited sample sizes. Here, we introduce a novel method that flexibly combines linear or nonlinear conditional independence tests with a causal discovery algorithm to estimate causal networks from large-scale time series datasets. We validate the method on time series of well-understood physical mechanisms in the climate system and the human heart and using large-scale synthetic datasets mimicking the typical properties of real-world data. The experiments demonstrate that our method outperforms state-of-the-art techniques in detection power, which opens up entirely new possibilities to discover and quantify causal networks from time series across a range of research fields

Some models are useful, but how do we know which ones? Towards a unified Bayesian model taxonomy

Probabilistic (Bayesian) modeling has experienced a surge of applications in almost all quantitative sciences and industrial areas. This development is driven by a combination of several factors, including better probabilistic estimation algorithms, flexible software, increased computing power, and a growing awareness of the benefits of probabilistic learning. However, a principled Bayesian model building workflow is far from complete and many challenges remain. To aid future research and applications of a principled Bayesian workflow, we ask and provide answers for what we perceive as two fundamental questions of Bayesian modeling, namely (a) "What actually is a Bayesian model?" and (b) "What makes a good Bayesian model?". As an answer to the first question, we propose the PAD model taxonomy that defines four basic kinds of Bayesian models, each representing some combination of the assumed joint distribution of all (known or unknown) variables (P), a posterior approximator (A), and training data (D). As an answer to the second question, we propose ten utility dimensions according to which we can evaluate Bayesian models holistically, namely, (1) causal consistency, (2) parameter recoverability, (3) predictive performance, (4) fairness, (5) structural faithfulness, (6) parsimony, (7) interpretability, (8) convergence, (9) estimation speed, and (10) robustness. Further, we propose two example utility decision trees that describe hierarchies and trade-offs between utilities depending on the inferential goals that drive model building and testing

We Are Not Your Real Parents: Telling Causal from Confounded using MDL

Given data over variables $(X_1,...,X_m, Y)$ we consider the problem of finding out whether $X$ jointly causes $Y$ or whether they are all confounded by an unobserved latent variable $Z$. To do so, we take an information-theoretic approach based on Kolmogorov complexity. In a nutshell, we follow the postulate that first encoding the true cause, and then the effects given that cause, results in a shorter description than any other encoding of the observed variables. The ideal score is not computable, and hence we have to approximate it. We propose to do so using the Minimum Description Length (MDL) principle. We compare the MDL scores under the models where $X$ causes $Y$ and where there exists a latent variables $Z$ confounding both $X$ and $Y$ and show our scores are consistent. To find potential confounders we propose using latent factor modeling, in particular, probabilistic PCA (PPCA). Empirical evaluation on both synthetic and real-world data shows that our method, CoCa, performs very well -- even when the true generating process of the data is far from the assumptions made by the models we use. Moreover, it is robust as its accuracy goes hand in hand with its confidence