This work is about estimating when a conditional generative model (CGM) can solve an in-context learning (ICL) problem. An in-context learning (ICL) problem comprises a CGM, a dataset, and a prediction task. The CGM could be a multi-modal foundation model; the dataset, a collection of patient histories, test results, and recorded diagnoses; and the prediction task to communicate a diagnosis to a new patient. A Bayesian interpretation of ICL assumes that the CGM computes a posterior predictive distribution over an unknown Bayesian model defining a joint distribution over latent explanations and observable data. From this perspective, Bayesian model criticism is a reasonable approach to assess the suitability of a given CGM for an ICL problem. However, such approaches---like posterior predictive checks (PPCs)---often assume that we can sample from the likelihood and posterior defined by the Bayesian model, which are not explicitly given for contemporary CGMs. To address this, we show when ancestral sampling from the predictive distribution of a CGM is equivalent to sampling datasets from the posterior predictive of the assumed Bayesian model. Then we develop the generative predictive $p$-value, which enables PPCs and their cousins for contemporary CGMs. The generative predictive $p$-value can be used in a statistical decision procedure to determine when the model is appropriate for an ICL problem. Our method only requires generating queries and responses from a CGM and evaluating its response log probability. Using large language models, we empirically evaluate our method on tasks involving tabular data, imaging data, and natural language data.

This paper proposes a step toward approximate Bayesian inference in on-policy actor-critic deep reinforcement learning. It is implemented through three changes to the Asynchronous Advantage Actor-Critic (A3C) algorithm: (1) applying a ReLU function to advantage estimates, (2) spectral normalization of actor-critic weights, and (3) incorporating *dropout as a Bayesian approximation*. We prove under standard assumptions that restricting policy updates to positive advantages optimizes for value by maximizing a lower bound on the value function plus an additive term. We show that the additive term is bounded proportional to the Lipschitz constant of the value function, which offers theoretical grounding for spectral normalization of critic weights. Finally, our application of dropout corresponds to approximate Bayesian inference over both the actor and critic parameters, which enables *adaptive state-aware* exploration around the modes of the actor via Thompson sampling. We demonstrate significant improvements for median and interquartile mean metrics over A3C, PPO, SAC, and TD3 on the MuJoCo continuous control benchmark and improvement over PPO in the challenging ProcGen generalization benchmark.

This paper presents a method for estimating the hallucination rate for in-context learning (ICL) with generative AI. In ICL, a conditional generative model (CGM) is prompted with a dataset and a prediction question and asked to generate a response. One interpretation of ICL assumes that the CGM computes the posterior predictive of an unknown Bayesian model, which implicitly defines a joint distribution over observable datasets and latent mechanisms. This joint distribution factorizes into two components: the model prior over mechanisms and the model likelihood of datasets given a mechanism. With this perspective, we define a \textit{hallucination} as a generated response to the prediction question with low model likelihood given the mechanism. We develop a new method that takes an ICL problem and estimates the probability that a CGM will generate a hallucination. Our method only requires generating prediction questions and responses from the CGM and evaluating its response log probability. We empirically evaluate our method using large language models for synthetic regression and natural language ICL tasks.

Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate surprising capabilities, but we do not understand how they are implemented. One hypothesis suggests that these capabilities are primarily executed by small subnetworks within the LLM, known as circuits. But how can we evaluate this hypothesis? In this paper, we formalize a set of criteria that a circuit is hypothesized to meet and develop a suite of hypothesis tests to evaluate how well circuits satisfy them. The criteria focus on the extent to which the LLM's behavior is preserved, the degree of localization of this behavior, and whether the circuit is minimal. We apply these tests to six circuits described in the research literature. We find that synthetic circuits -- circuits that are hard-coded in the model -- align with the idealized properties. Circuits discovered in Transformer models satisfy the criteria to varying degrees. To facilitate future empirical studies of circuits, we created the \textit{circuitry} package, a wrapper around the \textit{TransformerLens} library, which abstracts away lower-level manipulations of hooks and activations. The software is available at \url{https://github.com/blei-lab/circuitry}.

The discovery of therapeutics to treat genetically-driven pathologies relies on identifying genes involved in the underlying disease mechanism. Existing approaches search over the billions of potential interventions to maximize the expected influence on the target phenotype. However, to reduce the risk of failure in future stages of trials, practical experiment design aims to find a set of interventions that maximally change a target phenotype via diverse mechanisms. We propose DiscoBAX - a sample-efficient method for maximizing the rate of significant discoveries per experiment while simultaneously probing for a wide range of diverse mechanisms during a genomic experiment campaign. We provide theoretical guarantees of optimality under standard assumptions, and conduct a comprehensive experimental evaluation covering both synthetic as well as real-world experimental design tasks. DiscoBAX outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods for experimental design, selecting effective and diverse perturbations in biological systems.

Estimating heterogeneous treatment effects from observational data is a crucial task across many fields, helping policy and decision-makers take better actions. There has been recent progress on robust and efficient methods for estimating the conditional average treatment effect (CATE) function, but these methods often do not take into account the risk of hidden confounding, which could arbitrarily and unknowingly bias any causal estimate based on observational data. We propose a meta-learner called the B-Learner, which can efficiently learn sharp bounds on the CATE function under limits on the level of hidden confounding. We derive the B-Learner by adapting recent results for sharp and valid bounds of the average treatment effect (Dorn et al., 2021) into the framework given by Kallus & Oprescu (2023) for robust and model-agnostic learning of conditional distributional treatment effects. The B-Learner can use any function estimator such as random forests and deep neural networks, and we prove its estimates are valid, sharp, efficient, and have a quasi-oracle property with respect to the constituent estimators under more general conditions than existing methods. Semi-synthetic experimental comparisons validate the theoretical findings, and we use real-world data demonstrate how the method might be used in practice.

We introduce a gradient-based approach for the problem of Bayesian optimal experimental design to learn causal models in a batch setting --- a critical component for causal discovery from finite data where interventions can be costly or risky. Existing methods rely on greedy approximations to construct a batch of experiments while using black-box methods to optimize over a *single target-state* pair to intervene with. In this work, we completely dispose of the black-box optimization techniques and greedy heuristics and instead propose a conceptually simple end-to-end gradient-based optimization procedure to acquire a set of optimal intervention target-value pairs. Such a procedure enables parameterization of the design space to efficiently optimize over a batch of *multi-target-state* interventions, a setting which has hitherto not been explored due to its complexity. We demonstrate that our proposed method outperforms baselines and existing acquisition strategies in both single-target and multi-target settings across a number of synthetic datasets.

Inferring causal effects of continuous-valued treatments from observational data is a crucial task promising to better inform policy- and decision-makers. A critical assumption needed to identify these effects is that all confounding variables—causal parents of both the treatment and the outcome—are included as covariates. Unfortunately, given observational data alone, we cannot know with certainty that this criterion is satisfied. Sensitivity analyses provide principled ways to give bounds on causal estimates when confounding variables are hidden. While much attention is focused on sensitivity analyses for discrete-valued treatments, much less is paid to continuous-valued treatments. We present novel methodology to bound both average and conditional average continuous-valued treatment-effect estimates when they cannot be point identified due to hidden confounding. A semi-synthetic benchmark on multiple datasets shows our method giving tighter coverage of the true dose-response curve than a recently proposed continuous sensitivity model and baselines. Finally, we apply our method to a real-world observational case study to demonstrate the value of identifying dose-dependent causal effects.

Estimating the effects of continuous-valued interventions from observational data is a critically important task for climate science, healthcare, and economics. Recent work focuses on designing neural network architectures and regularization functions to allow for scalable estimation of average and individual-level dose-response curves from high-dimensional, large-sample data. Such methodologies assume ignorability (observation of all confounding variables) and positivity (observation of all treatment levels for every covariate value describing a set of units), assumptions problematic in the continuous treatment regime. Scalable sensitivity and uncertainty analyses to understand the ignorance induced in causal estimates when these assumptions are relaxed are less studied. Here, we develop a continuous treatment-effect marginal sensitivity model (CMSM) and derive bounds that agree with the observed data and a researcher-defined level of hidden confounding. We introduce a scalable algorithm and uncertainty-aware deep models to derive and estimate these bounds for high-dimensional, large-sample observational data. We work in concert with climate scientists interested in the climatological impacts of human emissions on cloud properties using satellite observations from the past 15 years. This problem is known to be complicated by many unobserved confounders.

Causal discovery from observational and interventional data is challenging due to limited data and non-identifiability which introduces uncertainties in estimating the underlying structural causal model (SCM). Incorporating these uncertainties and selecting optimal experiments (interventions) to perform can help to identify the true SCM faster. Existing methods in experimental design for causal discovery from limited data either rely on linear assumptions for the SCM or select only the intervention target. In this paper, we incorporate recent advances in Bayesian causal discovery into the Bayesian optimal experimental design framework, which allows for active causal discovery of nonlinear, large SCMs, while selecting both the target and the value to intervene with. We demonstrate the performance of the proposed method on synthetic graphs (Erdos-Rènyi, Scale Free) for both linear and nonlinear SCMs as well as on the \emph{in-silico} single-cell gene regulatory network dataset, DREAM.

We study the problem of learning conditional average treatment effects (CATE) from high-dimensional, observational data with unobserved confounders. Unobserved confounders introduce ignorance—a level of unidentifiability—about an individual’s response to treatment by inducing bias in CATE estimates. We present a new parametric interval estimator suited for high-dimensional data, that estimates a range of possible CATE values when given a predefined bound on the level of hidden confounding. Further, previous interval estimators do not account for ignorance about the CATE associated with samples that may be underrepresented in the original study, or samples that violate the overlap assumption. Our interval estimator also incorporates model uncertainty so that practitioners can be made aware of such out-of-distribution data. We prove that our estimator converges to tight bounds on CATE when there may be unobserved confounding and assess it using semi-synthetic, high-dimensional datasets.

Estimating personalized treatment effects from high-dimensional observational data is essential in situations where experimental designs are infeasible, unethical, or expensive. Existing approaches rely on fitting deep models on outcomes observed for treated and control populations. However, when measuring individual outcomes is costly, as is the case of a tumor biopsy, a sample-efficient strategy for acquiring each result is required. Deep Bayesian active learning provides a framework for efficient data acquisition by selecting points with high uncertainty. However, existing methods bias training data acquisition towards regions of non-overlapping support between the treated and control populations. These are not sample-efficient because the treatment effect is not identifiable in such regions. We introduce causal, Bayesian acquisition functions grounded in information theory that bias data acquisition towards regions with overlapping support to maximize sample efficiency for learning personalized treatment effects. We demonstrate the performance of the proposed acquisition strategies on synthetic and semi-synthetic datasets IHDP and CMNIST and their extensions, which aim to simulate common dataset biases and pathologies.

Recommending the best course of action for an individual is a major application of individual-level causal effect estimation. This application is often needed in safety-critical domains such as healthcare, where estimating and communicating uncertainty to decision-makers is crucial. We introduce a practical approach for integrating uncertainty estimation into a class of state-of-the-art neural network methods used for individual-level causal estimates. We show that our methods enable us to deal gracefully with situations of "no-overlap", common in high-dimensional data, where standard applications of causal effect approaches fail. Further, our methods allow us to handle covariate shift, where the train and test distributions differ, common when systems are deployed in practice. We show that when such a covariate shift occurs, correctly modeling uncertainty can keep us from giving overconfident and potentially harmful recommendations. We demonstrate our methodology with a range of state-of-the-art models. Under both covariate shift and lack of overlap, our uncertainty-equipped methods can alert decision makers when predictions are not to be trusted while outperforming standard methods that use the propensity score to identify lack of overlap.