Since Faithfulness Fails: The Performance Limits of Neural Causal Discovery

Neural causal discovery methods have recently improved in terms of scalability and computational efficiency. However, our systematic evaluation highlights significant room for improvement in their accuracy when uncovering causal structures. We identify a fundamental limitation: neural networks cannot reliably distinguish between existing and non-existing causal relationships in the finite sample regime. Our experiments reveal that neural networks, as used in contemporary causal discovery approaches, lack the precision needed to recover ground-truth graphs, even for small graphs and relatively large sample sizes. Furthermore, we identify the faithfulness property as a critical bottleneck: (i) it is likely to be violated across any reasonable dataset size range, and (ii) its violation directly undermines the performance of neural discovery methods. These findings lead us to conclude that progress within the current paradigm is fundamentally constrained, necessitating a paradigm shift in this domain.

Accurate estimation of feature importance faithfulness for tree models

In this paper, we consider a perturbation-based metric of predictive faithfulness of feature rankings (or attributions) that we call PGI squared. When applied to decision tree-based regression models, the metric can be computed accurately and efficiently for arbitrary independent feature perturbation distributions. In particular, the computation does not involve Monte Carlo sampling that has been typically used for computing similar metrics and which is inherently prone to inaccuracies. Moreover, we propose a method of ranking features by their importance for the tree model's predictions based on PGI squared. Our experiments indicate that in some respects, the method may identify the globally important features better than the state-of-the-art SHAP explainer