acceptodds
Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2027

Beyond Candidate Voting: Transformer Aggregation Meets Observational Evidence

Abstract

Causal discovery algorithms often return different graphs because they rely on different functional, distributional, and conditional-independence assumptions. Candidate-only ensembles can reduce this instability, but their predictions remain limited to information retained in the submitted graphs. We introduce CausalFusionFormer, a causal discovery framework comprising progressively richer variants: globally learned candidate weighting, edge-adaptive transformer aggregation, an independent data-driven expert, and a full hybrid that routes between transformer-aggregated candidates and observational evidence. Our primary candidate pool contains PC, GES-BIC, ICA-LiNGAM, NOTEARS, and DAGMA. Each algorithm contributes its full-data estimate and two bootstrap perturbations, yielding a shared 15-graph evidence budget. On 90 previously untouched locked tasks, the full hybrid obtains a directed F1 of \(0.661\), compared with \(0.612\) for a shared-budget adaptation of Causal-Bayes-Ensemble (CBE) and \(0.608\) for our global candidate-weighting variant (vo2026wild). Relative to the CBE adaptation, it improves directed F1 by \(0.050\) (\(p=0.0091\)) and AUPRC by \(0.094\) (\(p<10^-4\)). The framework also exposes complementary operating points: uniform candidate voting provides the strongest skeleton recovery and normalized structural Hamming distance, while our global-weighting variant provides the best calibration. On continuous structural-equation data generated over unseen Asia, CHILD, and ALARM graph topologies, the full hybrid achieves the highest macro directed F1. On Sachs, our global candidate-weighting variant ties matched full-data PC at \(0.439\) directed F1, while the full hybrid matches the CBE adaptation. Together, these results show that edge-adaptive transformer aggregation and observational correction can improve directed causal recovery beyond candidate-only Bayesian voting, while complementary variants of the framework support different accuracy, calibration, and transfer requirements.

Then back it, or bet against it.

Related papers

Open the market on this paper to see 7 more related papers.