analiza aiqbench
This survey establishes Causal Bayesian Optimization as a distinct field that leverages causal graphs to improve sample efficiency in intervention selection, particularly where standard non-causal baselines struggle with structural assumptions. The authors introduce a comprehensive benchmark suite and demonstrate that method performance is highly sensitive to dataset characteristics, budget constraints, and the robustness of underlying causal models. Key open challenges identified include scaling to unknown graph structures and ensuring robustness against causal assumption violations in real-world applications.
Causal Bayesian Optimization: Foundations, Methods, and Applications
arXiv:2609.24112v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Causal Bayesian Optimization (CBO) combines causal inference with Bayesian optimization to enable sample-efficient intervention selection in systems with causal structure. This survey provides a systematic review of CBO through a unified BO-loop perspective, showing how causal assumptions shape intervention search spaces, surrogate models, acquisition functions, and decision policies. We organize existing methods by graph and system-knowledge assumptions, environment, intervention representation, surrogate architecture, and decision rule, and connect CBO to causal bandits, Bayesian experimental design, safe optimization, policy search, and causal abstraction. We also introduce a reproducibility-oriented benchmark spanning hard- and soft-intervention settings, with standardized GAP and a new trajectory-aware Path-Aware GAP (PA-GAP), evaluating seven CBO methods and a non-causal BO baseline across thirteen datasets, three budgets, and two metrics. Results show that no method dominates uniformly: rankings depend on dataset, budget, metric, and how causal information is used, while strong non-causal baselines remain competitive in several settings. Controlled graph-misspecification and omitted-variable stress tests further show that rankings can change substantially when learner-side causal information is perturbed. We conclude by identifying key open challenges, including robustness to causal-assumption violations, scalable unknown-graph optimization, mixed intervention types, realistic cost models, stronger theoretical guarantees, and integration with modern representation learning and causal abstractions.
Abstract:Causal Bayesian Optimization (CBO) combines causal inference with Bayesian optimization to enable sample-efficient intervention selection in systems with causal structure. This survey provides a systematic review of CBO through a unified BO-loop perspective, showing how causal assumptions shape intervention search spaces, surrogate models, acquisition functions, and decision policies. We organize existing methods by graph and system-knowledge assumptions, environment, intervention representation, surrogate architecture, and decision rule, and connect CBO to causal bandits, Bayesian experimental design, safe optimization, policy search, and causal abstraction. We also introduce a reproducibility-oriented benchmark spanning hard- and soft-intervention settings, with standardized GAP and a new trajectory-aware Path-Aware GAP (PA-GAP), evaluating seven CBO methods and a non-causal BO baseline across thirteen datasets, three budgets, and two metrics. Results show that no method dominates uniformly: rankings depend on dataset, budget, metric, and how causal information is used, while strong non-causal baselines remain competitive in several settings. Controlled graph-misspecification and omitted-variable stress tests further show that rankings can change substantially when learner-side causal information is perturbed. We conclude by identifying key open challenges, including robustness to causal-assumption violations, scalable unknown-graph optimization, mixed intervention types, realistic cost models, stronger theoretical guarantees, and integration with modern representation learning and causal abstractions.
Machine Learning (stat.ML); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2609.24112 [stat.ML]
(or arXiv:2609.24112v1 [stat.ML] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.24112 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 296 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

PIRAMID: Progress and Plans
LessWrong · 27 iul. 2026

Introducing PIRAMID: Physics-Informed Research for Ambitious Mechanistic Interpretability
LessWrong · 25 iul. 2026
Amazon is investing in the Lean Focused Research Organization
Amazon Science · 26 iul. 2026

Amazon Research Awards recipients announced
Amazon Science · 27 mai 2026