CausalReasoningBenchmark: A Real-World Benchmark for Disentangled Evaluation of Causal Identification and Estimation

Many benchmarks for automated causal inference evaluate a system's performance based on a single numerical output, such as an Average Treatment Effect (ATE). This approach conflates two distinct steps in causal analysis: identification-formulating a valid research design under stated assumptions-and estimation-implementing that design numerically on finite data. We introduce CausalReasoningBenchmark, a benchmark of 173 queries across 138 real-world datasets, curated from 85 peer-reviewed research papers and four widely-used causal-inference textbooks. For each query a system must produce (i) a structured identification specification that names the strategy, the treatment, outcome, and control variables, and all design-specific elements, and (ii) a point estimate with a standard error. By scoring these two components separately, our benchmark enables granular diagnosis: it distinguishes failures in causal reasoning from errors in numerical execution. Baseline results with a state-of-the-art LLM show that, while the model correctly identifies the high-level strategy in 84 % of cases, full identification-specification correctness drops to only 30 %, revealing that the bottleneck lies in the nuanced details of research design rather than in computation. CausalReasoningBenchmark is publicly available on Hugging Face and is designed to foster the development of more robust automated causal-inference systems.

Statistical Inference and Learning for Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP)

The SHAP (short for Shapley additive explanation) framework has become an essential tool for attributing importance to variables in predictive tasks. In model-agnostic settings, SHAP uses the concept of Shapley values from cooperative game theory to fairly allocate credit to the features in a vector $X$ based on their contribution to an outcome $Y$. While the explanations offered by SHAP are local by nature, learners often need global measures of feature importance in order to improve model explainability and perform feature selection. The most common approach for converting these local explanations into global ones is to compute either the mean absolute SHAP or mean squared SHAP. However, despite their ubiquity, there do not exist approaches for performing statistical inference on these quantities. In this paper, we take a semi-parametric approach for calibrating confidence in estimates of the $p$th powers of Shapley additive explanations. We show that, by treating the SHAP curve as a nuisance function that must be estimated from data, one can reliably construct asymptotically normal estimates of the $p$th powers of SHAP. When $p \geq 2$, we show a de-biased estimator that combines U-statistics with Neyman orthogonal scores for functionals of nested regressions is asymptotically normal. When $1 \leq p < 2$ (and the hence target parameter is not twice differentiable), we construct de-biased U-statistics for a smoothed alternative. In particular, we show how to carefully tune the temperature parameter of the smoothing function in order to obtain inference for the true, unsmoothed $p$th power. We complement these results by presenting a Neyman orthogonal loss that can be used to learn the SHAP curve via empirical risk minimization and discussing excess risk guarantees for commonly used function classes.

Preference Learning with Response Time

This paper investigates the integration of response time data into human preference learning frameworks for more effective reward model elicitation. While binary preference data has become fundamental in fine-tuning foundation models, generative AI systems, and other large-scale models, the valuable temporal information inherent in user decision-making remains largely unexploited. We propose novel methodologies to incorporate response time information alongside binary choice data, leveraging the Evidence Accumulation Drift Diffusion (EZ) model, under which response time is informative of the preference strength. We develop Neyman-orthogonal loss functions that achieve oracle convergence rates for reward model learning, matching the theoretical optimal rates that would be attained if the expected response times for each query were known a priori. Our theoretical analysis demonstrates that for linear reward functions, conventional preference learning suffers from error rates that scale exponentially with reward magnitude. In contrast, our response time-augmented approach reduces this to polynomial scaling, representing a significant improvement in sample efficiency. We extend these guarantees to non-parametric reward function spaces, establishing convergence properties for more complex, realistic reward models. Our extensive experiments validate our theoretical findings in the context of preference learning over images.

Optimal Regret with Limited Adaptivity for Generalized Linear Contextual Bandits

We study the generalized linear contextual bandit problem within the requirements of limited adaptivity. In this paper, we present two algorithms, B-GLinCB and RS-GLinCB, that address, respectively, two prevalent limited adaptivity models: batch learning with stochastic contexts and rare policy switches with adversarial contexts. For both these models, we establish essentially tight regret bounds. Notably, in the obtained bounds, we manage to eliminate a dependence on a key parameter $\kappa$, which captures the non-linearity of the underlying reward model. For our batch learning algorithm B-GLinCB, with $\Omega\left( \log{\log T} \right)$ batches, the regret scales as $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{T})$. Further, we establish that our rarely switching algorithm RS-GLinCB updates its policy at most $\tilde{O}(\log^2 T)$ times and achieves a regret of $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{T})$. Our approach for removing the dependence on $\kappa$ for generalized linear contextual bandits might be of independent interest.

Nash Regret Guarantees for Linear Bandits

We obtain essentially tight upper bounds for a strengthened notion of regret in the stochastic linear bandits framework. The strengthening -- referred to as Nash regret -- is defined as the difference between the (a priori unknown) optimum and the geometric mean of expected rewards accumulated by the linear bandit algorithm. Since the geometric mean corresponds to the well-studied Nash social welfare (NSW) function, this formulation quantifies the performance of a bandit algorithm as the collective welfare it generates across rounds. NSW is known to satisfy fairness axioms and, hence, an upper bound on Nash regret provides a principled fairness guarantee. We consider the stochastic linear bandits problem over a horizon of $T$ rounds and with set of arms ${X}$ in ambient dimension $d$. Furthermore, we focus on settings in which the stochastic reward -- associated with each arm in ${X}$ -- is a non-negative, $\nu$-sub-Poisson random variable. For this setting, we develop an algorithm that achieves a Nash regret of $O\left( \sqrt{\frac{d\nu}{T}} \log( T |X|)\right)$. In addition, addressing linear bandit instances in which the set of arms ${X}$ is not necessarily finite, we obtain a Nash regret upper bound of $O\left( \frac{d^\frac{5}{4}\nu^{\frac{1}{2}}}{\sqrt{T}} \log(T)\right)$. Since bounded random variables are sub-Poisson, these results hold for bounded, positive rewards. Our linear bandit algorithm is built upon the successive elimination method with novel technical insights, including tailored concentration bounds and the use of sampling via John ellipsoid in conjunction with the Kiefer-Wolfowitz optimal design.

Learning Good Interventions in Causal Graphs via Covering

We study the causal bandit problem that entails identifying a near-optimal intervention from a specified set $A$ of (possibly non-atomic) interventions over a given causal graph. Here, an optimal intervention in ${A}$ is one that maximizes the expected value for a designated reward variable in the graph, and we use the standard notion of simple regret to quantify near optimality. Considering Bernoulli random variables and for causal graphs on $N$ vertices with constant in-degree, prior work has achieved a worst case guarantee of $\widetilde{O} (N/\sqrt{T})$ for simple regret. The current work utilizes the idea of covering interventions (which are not necessarily contained within ${A}$) and establishes a simple regret guarantee of $\widetilde{O}(\sqrt{N/T})$. Notably, and in contrast to prior work, our simple regret bound depends only on explicit parameters of the problem instance. We also go beyond prior work and achieve a simple regret guarantee for causal graphs with unobserved variables. Further, we perform experiments to show improvements over baselines in this setting.

Fairness and Welfare Quantification for Regret in Multi-Armed Bandits

We extend the notion of regret with a welfarist perspective. Focussing on the classic multi-armed bandit (MAB) framework, the current work quantifies the performance of bandit algorithms by applying a fundamental welfare function, namely the Nash social welfare (NSW) function. This corresponds to equating algorithm's performance to the geometric mean of its expected rewards and leads us to the study of Nash regret, defined as the difference between the -- a priori unknown -- optimal mean (among the arms) and the algorithm's performance. Since NSW is known to satisfy fairness axioms, our approach complements the utilitarian considerations of average (cumulative) regret, wherein the algorithm is evaluated via the arithmetic mean of its expected rewards. This work develops an algorithm that, given the horizon of play $T$, achieves a Nash regret of $O \left( \sqrt{\frac{{k \log T}}{T}} \right)$, here $k$ denotes the number of arms in the MAB instance. Since, for any algorithm, the Nash regret is at least as much as its average regret (the AM-GM inequality), the known lower bound on average regret holds for Nash regret as well. Therefore, our Nash regret guarantee is essentially tight. In addition, we develop an anytime algorithm with a Nash regret guarantee of $O \left( \sqrt{\frac{{k\log T}}{T}} \log T \right)$.