How Rules Represent Causal Knowledge: Causal Modeling with Abductive Logic Programs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.05088v1
• Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2025 15:12:01 GMT
• Title: How Rules Represent Causal Knowledge: Causal Modeling with Abductive Logic Programs
• Abstract summary: This paper extends Pearl's approach to causality and interventions to the setting of stratified abductive logic programs.<n>It shows how stable models of such programs can be given a causal interpretation by building on philosophical foundations.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Pearl observes that causal knowledge enables predicting the effects of interventions, such as actions, whereas descriptive knowledge only permits drawing conclusions from observation. This paper extends Pearl's approach to causality and interventions to the setting of stratified abductive logic programs. It shows how stable models of such programs can be given a causal interpretation by building on philosophical foundations and recent work by Bochman and Eelink et al. In particular, it provides a translation of abductive logic programs into causal systems, thereby clarifying the informal causal reading of logic program rules and supporting principled reasoning about external actions. The main result establishes that the stable model semantics for stratified programs conforms to key philosophical principles of causation, such as causal sufficiency, natural necessity, and irrelevance of unobserved effects. This justifies the use of stratified abductive logic programs as a framework for causal modeling and for predicting the effects of interventions

Related papers

• Logic Programming Semantics for Causal Processes [0.0]
  We investigate the relationship between logic programming semantics and the eventual states of causal processes compatible with those logic programs.<n>We show that while stable models of positive logic programs correspond to the eventual states of processes commencing from a neutral state and continuing undisturbed indefinitely, supported models describe the eventual states reachable from arbitrary starting points.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-23T11:48:45Z)
• How Rules Represent Causal Knowledge: Causal Modeling with Probabilistic Logic Programming [0.0]
  This paper brings Pearl's approach to causality into probabilistic logic programming (PLP)<n>A formal causal semantics for these programs, together with a notion of intervention and an implementation, is proposed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-23T11:21:39Z)
• Causal Scaffolding for Physical Reasoning: A Benchmark for Causally-Informed Physical World Understanding in VLMs [49.55219052565761]
  CausalPhys is a benchmark of over 3,000 carefully curated video- and image-based questions spanning four domains: Perception, Anticipation, Intervention, and Goal Orientation.<n>Each question is paired with an expert-annotated causal graph capturing object-attribute-event dependencies, enabling interpretable and fine-grained evaluation of causal understanding.<n>Building on this, we formulate a causal-graph-grounded metric that quantitatively measures how well a model's chain-of-thought reasoning aligns with the correct causal relations.<n>We propose Causal Rationale-informed Fine-Tuning (CRFT), which explicitly
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-04T10:07:05Z)
• Causal-Audit: Explicit and Auditable Graph-based Reasoning via Target-Aware Causal Chain Construction [14.96995835279229]
  Causal and intervention-based question answering is fundamental to advancing large language models.<n>We propose an explicit and auditable causal reasoning framework for context-free intervention-based question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-22T23:24:18Z)
• CausalFlip: A Benchmark for LLM Causal Judgment Beyond Semantic Matching [50.65932158912512]
  We propose a new causal reasoning benchmark, CausalFlip, to encourage the development of new large language models.<n>CaulFlip consists of causal judgment questions built over event triples that could form different confounder, chain, and collider relations.<n>We evaluate LLMs under multiple training paradigms, including answer-only training, explicit Chain-of-Thought supervision, and a proposed internalized causal reasoning approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-23T18:06:15Z)
• Interpreting and Controlling LLM Reasoning through Integrated Policy Gradient [27.26870804635122]
  Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate strong reasoning abilities in solving complex real-world problems.<n> internal mechanisms driving these complex reasoning behaviors remain opaque.<n>We propose Integrated Policy Gradient (IPG), a novel framework that attributes reasoning behaviors to model's inner components.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T16:43:09Z)
• Unifying Deductive and Abductive Reasoning in Knowledge Graphs with Masked Diffusion Model [64.31242163019242]
  Deductive and abductive reasoning are critical paradigms for analyzing knowledge graphs.<n>We propose a unified framework for Deductive and Abductive Reasoning in Knowledge graphs, called DARK.<n>We show that DARK achieves state-of-the-art performance on both deductive and abductive reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-13T14:34:57Z)
• Causal Reflection with Language Models [0.276240219662896]
  We introduce Causal Reflection, a framework that explicitly models causality as a dynamic function over state, action, time, and perturbation.<n>We define a formal Reflect mechanism that identifies mismatches between predicted and observed outcomes and generates causal hypotheses to revise the agent's internal model.<n>Our framework lays the theoretical groundwork for Causal Reflective agents that can adapt, self-correct, and communicate causal understanding in evolving environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-06T14:44:23Z)
• Failure Modes of LLMs for Causal Reasoning on Narratives [51.19592551510628]
  We investigate the interaction between world knowledge and logical reasoning.<n>We find that state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) often rely on superficial generalizations.<n>We show that simple reformulations of the task can elicit more robust reasoning behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-31T12:48:58Z)
• Phenomenal Yet Puzzling: Testing Inductive Reasoning Capabilities of Language Models with Hypothesis Refinement [92.61557711360652]
  Language models (LMs) often fall short on inductive reasoning, despite achieving impressive success on research benchmarks. We conduct a systematic study of the inductive reasoning capabilities of LMs through iterative hypothesis refinement. We reveal several discrepancies between the inductive reasoning processes of LMs and humans, shedding light on both the potentials and limitations of using LMs in inductive reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-12T17:51:10Z)
• Modeling Hierarchical Reasoning Chains by Linking Discourse Units and Key Phrases for Reading Comprehension [80.99865844249106]
  We propose a holistic graph network (HGN) which deals with context at both discourse level and word level, as the basis for logical reasoning. Specifically, node-level and type-level relations, which can be interpreted as bridges in the reasoning process, are modeled by a hierarchical interaction mechanism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-21T07:34:27Z)
• Argumentative Characterizations of (Extended) Disjunctive Logic Programs [2.055949720959582]
  We show that assumption-based argumentation can represent not only normal logic programs, but also disjunctive logic programs and their extensions. We consider some inference rules for disjunction that the core logic of the argumentation frameworks should respect.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-12T14:01:38Z)
• Learning Causally Disentangled Representations via the Principle of Independent Causal Mechanisms [17.074858228123706]
  We propose a framework for learning causally disentangled representations supervised by causally related observed labels. We show that our framework induces highly disentangled causal factors, improves interventional robustness, and is compatible with counterfactual generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-02T00:28:48Z)
• Causal Inference Principles for Reasoning about Commonsense Causality [93.19149325083968]
  Commonsense causality reasoning aims at identifying plausible causes and effects in natural language descriptions that are deemed reasonable by an average person. Existing work usually relies on deep language models wholeheartedly, and is potentially susceptible to confounding co-occurrences. Motivated by classical causal principles, we articulate the central question of CCR and draw parallels between human subjects in observational studies and natural languages. We propose a novel framework, ROCK, to Reason O(A)bout Commonsense K(C)ausality, which utilizes temporal signals as incidental supervision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-31T06:12:39Z)
• A Topological Perspective on Causal Inference [10.965065178451104]
  We show that substantive assumption-free causal inference is possible only in a meager set of structural causal models. Our results show that inductive assumptions sufficient to license valid causal inferences are statistically unverifiable in principle. An additional benefit of our topological approach is that it easily accommodates SCMs with infinitely many variables.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-18T23:09:03Z)
• Thinking About Causation: A Causal Language with Epistemic Operators [58.720142291102135]
  We extend the notion of a causal model with a representation of the state of an agent. On the side of the object language, we add operators to express knowledge and the act of observing new information. We provide a sound and complete axiomatization of the logic, and discuss the relation of this framework to causal team semantics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-30T12:16:45Z)
• Towards Interpretable Reasoning over Paragraph Effects in Situation [126.65672196760345]
  We focus on the task of reasoning over paragraph effects in situation, which requires a model to understand the cause and effect. We propose a sequential approach for this task which explicitly models each step of the reasoning process with neural network modules. In particular, five reasoning modules are designed and learned in an end-to-end manner, which leads to a more interpretable model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-03T04:03:52Z)

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.