Measuring the Reliability of Causal Probing Methods: Tradeoffs, Limitations, and the Plight of Nullifying Interventions

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.15510v1
• Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 03:45:49 GMT
• Title: Measuring the Reliability of Causal Probing Methods: Tradeoffs, Limitations, and the Plight of Nullifying Interventions
• Authors: Marc Canby, Adam Davies, Chirag Rastogi, Julia Hockenmaier,
• Abstract summary: Causal probing is an approach to interpreting foundation models, such as large language models. We propose a general empirical analysis framework to evaluate the reliability of causal probing interventions.
• Score: 3.173096780177902
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Causal probing is an approach to interpreting foundation models, such as large language models, by training probes to recognize latent properties of interest from embeddings, intervening on probes to modify this representation, and analyzing the resulting changes in the model's behavior. While some recent works have cast doubt on the theoretical basis of several leading causal probing intervention methods, it has been unclear how to systematically and empirically evaluate their effectiveness in practice. To address this problem, we propose a general empirical analysis framework to evaluate the reliability of causal probing interventions, formally defining and quantifying two key causal probing desiderata: completeness (fully transforming the representation of the target property) and selectivity (minimally impacting other properties). Our formalism allows us to make the first direct comparisons between different families of causal probing methods (e.g., linear vs. nonlinear or counterfactual vs. nullifying interventions). We conduct extensive experiments across several leading methods, finding that (1) there is an inherent tradeoff between these criteria, and no method is able to consistently satisfy both at once; and (2) across the board, nullifying interventions are always far less complete than counterfactual interventions, indicating that nullifying methods may not be an effective approach to causal probing.

Related papers

• Causal Inference from Text: Unveiling Interactions between Variables [20.677407402398405]
  Existing methods only account for confounding covariables that affect both treatment and outcome. This bias arises from insufficient consideration of non-confounding covariables. In this work, we aim to mitigate the bias by unveiling interactions between different variables.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-09T11:29:44Z)
• Advancing Counterfactual Inference through Nonlinear Quantile Regression [77.28323341329461]
  We propose a framework for efficient and effective counterfactual inference implemented with neural networks. The proposed approach enhances the capacity to generalize estimated counterfactual outcomes to unseen data. Empirical results conducted on multiple datasets offer compelling support for our theoretical assertions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-09T08:30:51Z)
• Nonparametric Identifiability of Causal Representations from Unknown Interventions [63.1354734978244]
  We study causal representation learning, the task of inferring latent causal variables and their causal relations from mixtures of the variables. Our goal is to identify both the ground truth latents and their causal graph up to a set of ambiguities which we show to be irresolvable from interventional data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-01T10:51:58Z)
• Disentangled Representation for Causal Mediation Analysis [25.114619307838602]
  Causal mediation analysis is a method that is often used to reveal direct and indirect effects. Deep learning shows promise in mediation analysis, but the current methods only assume latent confounders that affect treatment, mediator and outcome simultaneously. We propose the Disentangled Mediation Analysis Variational AutoEncoder (DMAVAE), which disentangles the representations of latent confounders into three types to accurately estimate the natural direct effect, natural indirect effect and total effect.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-19T23:37:17Z)
• BaCaDI: Bayesian Causal Discovery with Unknown Interventions [118.93754590721173]
  BaCaDI operates in the continuous space of latent probabilistic representations of both causal structures and interventions. In experiments on synthetic causal discovery tasks and simulated gene-expression data, BaCaDI outperforms related methods in identifying causal structures and intervention targets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-03T16:25:48Z)
• Empirical Estimates on Hand Manipulation are Recoverable: A Step Towards Individualized and Explainable Robotic Support in Everyday Activities [80.37857025201036]
  Key challenge for robotic systems is to figure out the behavior of another agent. Processing correct inferences is especially challenging when (confounding) factors are not controlled experimentally. We propose equipping robots with the necessary tools to conduct observational studies on people.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-27T22:15:56Z)
• Estimation of Bivariate Structural Causal Models by Variational Gaussian Process Regression Under Likelihoods Parametrised by Normalising Flows [74.85071867225533]
  Causal mechanisms can be described by structural causal models. One major drawback of state-of-the-art artificial intelligence is its lack of explainability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-06T14:52:58Z)
• Latent Instrumental Variables as Priors in Causal Inference based on Independence of Cause and Mechanism [2.28438857884398]
  We study the role of latent variables such as latent instrumental variables and hidden common causes in the causal graphical structures. We derive a novel algorithm to infer causal relationships between two variables.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-17T08:18:19Z)
• A One-step Approach to Covariate Shift Adaptation [82.01909503235385]
  A default assumption in many machine learning scenarios is that the training and test samples are drawn from the same probability distribution. We propose a novel one-step approach that jointly learns the predictive model and the associated weights in one optimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-08T11:35:47Z)
• Identifying Causal-Effect Inference Failure with Uncertainty-Aware Models [41.53326337725239]
  We introduce a practical approach for integrating uncertainty estimation into a class of state-of-the-art neural network methods. We show that our methods enable us to deal gracefully with situations of "no-overlap", common in high-dimensional data. We show that correctly modeling uncertainty can keep us from giving overconfident and potentially harmful recommendations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-01T00:37:41Z)
• MissDeepCausal: Causal Inference from Incomplete Data Using Deep Latent Variable Models [14.173184309520453]
  State-of-the-art methods for causal inference don't consider missing values. Missing data require an adapted unconfoundedness hypothesis. Latent confounders whose distribution is learned through variational autoencoders adapted to missing values are considered.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-25T12:58:07Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.