CauTion: Knowing When to Trust LLMs for Ensemble Causal Discovery

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.03602v1
• Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2026 13:07:43 GMT
• Title: CauTion: Knowing When to Trust LLMs for Ensemble Causal Discovery
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) offer a promising source of domain knowledge to complement statistical inference.<n>We propose CauTion, a framework that reliably integrates LLM domain knowledge into an ensemble of statistical causal discovery algorithms.<n>CauTion consistently outperforms both data-centric and LLM-augmented baselines.
• Score: 51.07538881798502
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Causal discovery from observational data remains challenging due to the fundamental limitations of purely statistical methods, such as statistical distinguishability within equivalence classes and sensitivity to finite sample sizes. While large language models (LLMs) offer a promising source of domain knowledge to complement statistical inference, existing LLM-augmented methods are vulnerable to LLM errors and incur high token costs. Moreover, reliance on a single data-centric algorithm can make results sensitive to algorithm-specific biases. To address these limitations, we propose CauTion, a framework that reliably integrates LLM domain knowledge into an ensemble of statistical causal discovery algorithms through consensus filtering and LLM reliability estimation. CauTion proceeds in three stages. First, an algorithm ensemble utilizes a consensus voting to resolve up to 96% of edges on which algorithms agree, achieving near-perfect accuracy on the filtered consensus edges. Second, a trust-calibrated arbitration mechanism estimates the relative reliability of the LLM and the algorithms via an annotation-free trust calibration procedure, which is then utilized to govern a trust-weighted voting process that restricts LLM arbitration exclusively to edges with unreliable algorithmic evidence. Third, a cycle repair step is applied to guarantee the final causal graph is validly acyclic. Experiments on six datasets demonstrate that CauTion consistently outperforms both data-centric and LLM-augmented baselines, with larger gains on larger graphs and strong robustness to LLM errors. Code is available at https://github.com/OpenCausaLab/CauTion.

Related papers

• LLM-as-a-Verifier: A General-Purpose Verification Framework [74.40111651545979]
  We introduce LLM-as-a-Verifier, a general-purpose verification framework.<n>It provides fine-grained feedback for agentic tasks without requiring additional training.<n>It achieves state-of-the-art performance on several benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-06T17:59:35Z)
• Robust LLM Performance Certification via Constrained Maximum Likelihood Estimation [14.465019747508604]
  We propose a new, practical, and efficient approach to LLM failure rate estimation based on constrained maximum-likelihood estimation (MLE)<n>We validate our approach through a comprehensive empirical study, benchmarking it against state-of-the-art baselines like Prediction-Powered Inference (PPI)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-11T21:48:40Z)
• BEAVER: An Efficient Deterministic LLM Verifier [11.949243456810263]
  We present BEAVER, the first practical framework for computing deterministic, sound probability bounds on large language models.<n>We formalize the verification problem, prove soundness of our approach, and evaluate BEAVER on correctness verification, privacy verification and secure code generation tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-05T05:34:06Z)
• Reasoning with Confidence: Efficient Verification of LLM Reasoning Steps via Uncertainty Heads [104.9566359759396]
  We propose a lightweight alternative for step-level reasoning verification based on data-driven uncertainty scores.<n>Our findings suggest that the internal states of LLMs encode their uncertainty and can serve as reliable signals for reasoning verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-09T03:38:29Z)
• LLM-Driven Adaptive Source-Sink Identification and False Positive Mitigation for Static Analysis [0.0]
  textscAdaTaint adaptively infers source/sink specifications and filters spurious alerts through neuro-symbolic reasoning.<n>textscAdaTaint grounds model suggestions in program facts and constraint validation, ensuring both adaptability and determinism.<n>Results show that textscAdaTaint reduces false positives by textbf43.7% on average and improves recall by textbf11.2% compared to state-of-the-art baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-06T03:44:10Z)
• Realizing LLMs' Causal Potential Requires Science-Grounded, Novel Benchmarks [20.409472830397455]
  Recent claims of strong performance by Large Language Models (LLMs) on causal discovery are undermined by a key flaw: many evaluations rely on benchmarks likely included in pretraining corpora.<n>We challenge this narrative by asking: Do LLMs truly reason about causal structure, and how can we measure it without memorization concerns?<n>We argue that realizing LLMs' potential for causal analysis requires two shifts: (P.1) developing robust evaluation protocols based on recent scientific studies to guard against dataset leakage, and (P.2) designing hybrid methods that combine LLM-derived knowledge with data-driven statistics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-18T14:58:04Z)
• LLM as an Algorithmist: Enhancing Anomaly Detectors via Programmatic Synthesis [40.82779720776548]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) show remarkable reasoning capabilities.<n>Our framework repositions the LLM from a data processor'' to an algorithmist''
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-04T19:00:51Z)
• Unsupervised Conformal Inference: Bootstrapping and Alignment to Control LLM Uncertainty [49.19257648205146]
  We propose an unsupervised conformal inference framework for generation.<n>Our gates achieve close-to-nominal coverage and provide tighter, more stable thresholds than split UCP.<n>The result is a label-free, API-compatible gate for test-time filtering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-26T23:40:47Z)
• Uncertainty-Guided Chain-of-Thought for Code Generation with LLMs [45.33160999781074]
  Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning has been demonstrated as an effective technique for improving the problem-solving capabilities of large language models (LLMs)<n>We introduce UnCert-CoT, an approach designed to enhance code generation by incorporating an uncertainty-aware CoT reasoning mechanism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-19T15:40:45Z)
• Exploring Automatic Cryptographic API Misuse Detection in the Era of LLMs [60.32717556756674]
  This paper introduces a systematic evaluation framework to assess Large Language Models in detecting cryptographic misuses. Our in-depth analysis of 11,940 LLM-generated reports highlights that the inherent instabilities in LLMs can lead to over half of the reports being false positives. The optimized approach achieves a remarkable detection rate of nearly 90%, surpassing traditional methods and uncovering previously unknown misuses in established benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-23T15:31:26Z)
• Decomposing Uncertainty for Large Language Models through Input Clarification Ensembling [69.83976050879318]
  In large language models (LLMs), identifying sources of uncertainty is an important step toward improving reliability, trustworthiness, and interpretability. In this paper, we introduce an uncertainty decomposition framework for LLMs, called input clarification ensembling. Our approach generates a set of clarifications for the input, feeds them into an LLM, and ensembles the corresponding predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T05:58:35Z)

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.