Interventional Causal Circuits for Safe Robot Action Testing and Failure Recovery

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.14826v1
• Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2026 10:41:20 GMT
• Title: Interventional Causal Circuits for Safe Robot Action Testing and Failure Recovery
• Abstract summary: Formal testing of motion parameters is computationally expensive, and the cost scales poorly with the dimensionality of the action space.<n>We propose a closed-loop framework that couples a Joint Probability Tree (JPT) with a Causal Circuit derived from a Marginal-Deterministic Variable Tree.<n>The framework validates tractability of all interventional queries before the robot begins operating, and out-of-support candidates are detected and excluded from correction automatically.
• Score: 4.492262382019958
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Safe physical AI for robot actions are required not only likely to succeed but tested to be safe before execution. In practice, however, formal testing of motion parameters is computationally expensive, and the cost scales poorly with the dimensionality of the action space. When a proposed action is rejected by a tester, the naive response is to resample blindly until a passing candidate is found. This is wasteful, uninformative, and offers no convergence. We argue that rejection should instead trigger causal diagnosis: a principled identification of which action parameter caused the failure and what corrective value maximises the probability of passing testing under the interventional probability distribution. We propose a closed-loop framework that couples a Joint Probability Tree (JPT) with a Causal Circuit derived from a Marginal-Deterministic Variable Tree, enabling exact polytime computation without retraining, or additional data collection. The framework validates tractability of all interventional queries before the robot begins operating, and out-of-support candidates are detected and excluded from correction automatically. We perform experiments in a ROS2 simulation environment, and the framework demonstrates complementary roles across quality of distribution: under a high-quality JPT, the Causal Circuit reduces failed attempts by 10.3% and under a degraded JPT, it reduces total failed attempts by 37%. Every rejected plan produces a structured, interpretable causal report naming the primary cause variable, its observed value, and the recommended corrective region, supporting operator oversight and autonomous recovery without a separately trained failure model.

Related papers

• Calibrated Predictive Safety for Heterogeneous Robots: An Action-Conditioned JEPA Framework with Model-Based Safety Shields [2.299706695317804]
  We study whether an action-conditioned Joint-Embedding Predictive Architecture world model can predict, before execution, both task progress and physical risk for candidate action chunks.<n>We propose a receding-horizon decision pipeline: (1) a proposer produces K candidate action chunks; (2) an action-conditioned JEPA rolls each candidate forward in a frozen-encoder latent space conditioned on an embodiment embedding; (3) risk and progress heads score each rollout and report uncertainty; (4) a deterministic per-embodiment safety shield filters inadmissible candidates; (5) a fallback ladder handles empty-admissible-set cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-18T08:24:08Z)
• Can AI Agents Simulate A/B Test Outcomes? A Validation Framework for Agentic Experimentation [1.4180331276028662]
  A/B testing remains the standard for rolling out new features in the technology industry.<n>Can AI agents---conditioned on behavioral profiles and contextual descriptions of the intervention---simulate outcomes accurately enough to vet candidate treatments before committing live traffic?<n>We formalize this question as a emphSimulated Randomized Controlled Trial (S-RCT) and derive a two-layer error decomposition that separates agent approximation error from subsampling error.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-03T14:58:06Z)
• Causal Agent Replay: Counterfactual Attribution for LLM-Agent Failures [0.0]
  Causal Agent Replay (CAR) models an agent run as a structural causal model.<n>It applies a do-operation to a step, and re-executes a trajectory forward under the same policy.<n>CAR is open source and runs on hosted or free local models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-06T17:44:23Z)
• VerifyMAS: Hypothesis Verification for Failure Attribution in LLM Multi-Agent Systems [79.51005192758262]
  Large language model-driven multi-agent systems excel at complex tasks.<n>However, unreliable agents remain a key bottleneck to system-level reliability.<n>We propose a hypothesis verification framework for agent failure attribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T14:09:35Z)
• Correct Answers from Sound Reasoning: Verifiable Process Supervision for Language Models [94.68358825189738]
  We propose a post-training framework for verifiable domains that jointly optimize prediction accuracy and reasoning quality.<n>We evaluate VPS on chess, a controlled testbed where reasoning steps can be deterministically verified against engine signals.<n>VPS preserves accuracy while significantly improving reasoning quality, reducing win-rate error by up to 30% and restoring consistency to near saturation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-03T15:19:46Z)
• Automated Self-Testing as a Quality Gate: Evidence-Driven Release Management for LLM Applications [51.56484100374058]
  We present an automated self-testing framework that introduces quality gates with evidence-based release decisions.<n>We evaluate the framework through a longitudinal case study of an internally deployed multi-agent conversational AI system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-13T20:44:15Z)
• Machine Learning for Stress Testing: Uncertainty Decomposition in Causal Panel Prediction [2.289837306672451]
  Regulatory stress testing requires projecting credit losses under hypothetical macroeconomic scenarios.<n>We propose a framework for policy-path counterfactual inference in panels.<n>We validate all results through simulation and semi-synthetic experiments with real unemployment data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-08T03:22:38Z)
• Right for the Wrong Reasons: Epistemic Regret Minimization for Causal Rung Collapse in LLMs [0.0]
  We show that machine learning systems that are "right for the wrong reasons" achieve high performance through shortcuts that collapse under distributional shift.<n>When outcome-based learning reinforces correct answers, the agent becomes entrenched in flawed reasoning.<n>We propose Epistemic Regret Minimization (ERM), a belief revision objective that penalizes errors in causal reasoning independently of task success.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-12T07:48:21Z)
• LEC: Linear Expectation Constraints for False-Discovery Control in Selective Prediction and Routing Systems [95.35293543918762]
  Large language models (LLMs) often generate unreliable answers, while uncertainty methods fail to fully distinguish correct from incorrect predictions.<n>We address this issue through the lens of false discovery rate (FDR) control, ensuring that among all accepted predictions, the proportion of errors does not exceed a target risk level.<n>We propose LEC, which reinterprets selective prediction as a constrained decision problem by enforcing a Linear Expectation Constraint.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-01T11:27:09Z)
• Discovering Causal Relationships using Proxy Variables under Unmeasured Confounding [42.70985072862832]
  Inferring causal relationships between variable pairs in the observational study is crucial but challenging.<n>We develop a general nonparametric approach that accommodates both discrete and continuous settings for testing causal hypothesis under unmeasured confounders.<n>We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach through extensive simulations and real-world data from the Intensive Care Data and World Values Survey.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-20T05:13:12Z)
• Abduct, Act, Predict: Scaffolding Causal Inference for Automated Failure Attribution in Multi-Agent Systems [20.846301581161978]
  Failure attribution in multi-agent systems is a critical yet unsolved challenge.<n>Current methods treat this as a pattern recognition task over long conversation logs.<n>A2P Scaffolding transforms failure attribution from pattern recognition into a structured causal inference task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-12T16:51:15Z)
• COIN: Uncertainty-Guarding Selective Question Answering for Foundation Models with Provable Risk Guarantees [51.5976496056012]
  COIN is an uncertainty-guarding selection framework that calibrates statistically valid thresholds to filter a single generated answer per question.<n>COIN estimates the empirical error rate on a calibration set and applies confidence interval methods to establish a high-probability upper bound on the true error rate.<n>We demonstrate COIN's robustness in risk control, strong test-time power in retaining admissible answers, and predictive efficiency under limited calibration data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-25T07:04:49Z)
• Will My Robot Achieve My Goals? Predicting the Probability that an MDP Policy Reaches a User-Specified Behavior Target [56.99669411766284]
  As an autonomous system performs a task, it should maintain a calibrated estimate of the probability that it will achieve the user's goal. This paper considers settings where the user's goal is specified as a target interval for a real-valued performance summary. We compute the probability estimates by inverting conformal prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-29T18:41:20Z)

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.