Causal discovery in time-series datasets is critical for understanding complex systems, especially when the \textit{effectiveness} of causal relationships depends on both the \textit{duration} and \textit{magnitude} of the cause. We introduce a novel framework for causal discovery based on \textbf{Signal Temporal Logic (STL)}, enabling the extraction of interpretable causal diagrams (STL-CD) that explicitly capture these temporal dynamics. Our method first identifies statistically meaningful time intervals, then infers STL formulas that classify system behaviors, and finally employs transfer entropy to determine direct causal relationships among the formulas. This approach not only uncovers causal structure but also identifies the temporal persistence required for causal influence—an insight missed by existing methods. Experimental results on synthetic and real-world datasets demonstrate that our method achieves superior structural accuracy over state-of-the-art baselines, providing more informative and temporally precise causal models.

We consider the problem of explaining the temporal behavior of black-box systems using human-interpretable models. Following recent research trends, we rely on the fundamental yet interpretable models of deterministic finite automata (DFAs) and linear temporal logic (LTL_f) formulas. In contrast to most existing works for learning DFAs and LTL_f formulas, we consider learning from only positive examples. Our motivation is that negative examples are generally difficult to observe, in particular, from black-box systems. To learn meaningful models from positive examples only, we design algorithms that rely on conciseness and language minimality of models as regularizers. Our learning algorithms are based on two approaches: a symbolic and a counterexample-guided one. The symbolic approach exploits an efficient encoding of language minimality as a constraint satisfaction problem, whereas the counterexample-guided one relies on generating suitable negative examples to guide the learning. Both approaches provide us with effective algorithms with minimality guarantees on the learned models. To assess the effectiveness of our algorithms, we evaluate them on a few practical case studies.