REVIEW 5 cited by
Causality for Large Language Models
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Recent breakthroughs in artificial intelligence have driven a paradigm shift, where large language models (LLMs) with billions or trillions of parameters are trained on vast datasets, achieving unprecedented success across a series of language tasks. However, despite these successes, LLMs still rely on probabilistic modeling, which often captures spurious correlations rooted in linguistic patterns and social stereotypes, rather than the true causal relationships between entities and events. This limitation renders LLMs vulnerable to issues such as demographic biases, social stereotypes, and LLM hallucinations. These challenges highlight the urgent need to integrate causality into LLMs, moving beyond correlation-driven paradigms to build more reliable and ethically aligned AI systems. While many existing surveys and studies focus on utilizing prompt engineering to activate LLMs for causal knowledge or developing benchmarks to assess their causal reasoning abilities, most of these efforts rely on human intervention to activate pre-trained models. How to embed causality into the training process of LLMs and build more general and intelligent models remains unexplored. Recent research highlights that LLMs function as causal parrots, capable of reciting causal knowledge without truly understanding or applying it. These prompt-based methods are still limited to human interventional improvements. This survey aims to address this gap by exploring how causality can enhance LLMs at every stage of their lifecycle-from token embedding learning and foundation model training to fine-tuning, alignment, inference, and evaluation-paving the way for more interpretable, reliable, and causally-informed models. Additionally, we further outline six promising future directions to advance LLM development, enhance their causal reasoning capabilities, and address the current limitations these models face.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
Causal-Audit: Explicit and Auditable Graph-based Reasoning via Target-Aware Causal Chain Construction
A four-stage LLM framework that constructs, audits, and aggregates explicit causal chains outperforms prompting baselines on three context-free causal QA benchmarks.
-
Unveiling Causal Reasoning in Large Language Models: Reality or Mirage?
LLMs perform much worse on causal questions built from post-cutoff news articles, suggesting their apparent causal skill is mostly memorization, and a general-knowledge prompt method only partly closes the gap.
-
CAT: Causal Attention Tuning For Injecting Fine-grained Causal Knowledge into Large Language Models
A training method that injects token-level causal labels into attention improves out-of-distribution accuracy on a synthetic benchmark and slightly on math/reasoning tasks.
-
On using AI for EEG-based BCI applications: problems, current challenges and future trends
A perspective paper argues that EEG-BCI generalization failures stem from causally induced distribution shifts and that current EEG datasets are orders of magnitude too small to support large brain models.
-
Beyond Correlation: Towards Causal Large Language Model Agents in Biomedicine
A position paper arguing that biomedical AI should move from correlation-based LLMs toward agentic systems that perform intervention-based causal reasoning, and listing the challenges and opportunities.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.