pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.03227 · v1 · pith:H6XVYTPKnew · submitted 2026-06-02 · 💻 cs.LG

Learning Temporal Causal Structure via Smooth Differentiable Optimization

Tong Zhao , Ce Guo , Wayne Luk , Emil Lupu , Ray Dipojjwal This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 11:16 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.LG
keywords causal discoverytime seriesSVARGumbel-Sinkhornacyclicitydifferentiable optimizationstructural vector autoregressivepermutation learning
0
0 comments X

The pith

Learning a differentiable permutation via Gumbel-Sinkhorn converts acyclicity into a parameterization for unified gradient-based optimization of SVAR causal models.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a method for causal discovery in multivariate time series that must capture both lagged and instantaneous effects while keeping the instantaneous structure acyclic. Prior approaches either split the problem into separate stages or rely on augmented Lagrangian methods to enforce acyclicity, both of which slow computation. The new approach instead learns a variable ordering through the Gumbel-Sinkhorn operator and uses that ordering to triangularize the instantaneous coefficient matrix inside an SVAR model. Because the triangular form is produced by the parameterization itself, acyclicity holds automatically at every step of gradient descent. This produces a single continuous optimization loop that the authors report outperforms twelve baselines on accuracy and speed across three real-world datasets while scaling to larger problems with more than sixfold speedup.

Core claim

The central claim is that a differentiable permutation of the observed variables, obtained from the Gumbel-Sinkhorn operator, can be used to triangularize the instantaneous coefficient matrix of an SVAR model; the resulting parameterization keeps the matrix acyclic by construction and thereby replaces the usual hard acyclicity constraint with a continuous, gradient-friendly representation that supports end-to-end learning of the full temporal causal structure.

What carries the argument

Gumbel-Sinkhorn operator that produces a differentiable permutation used to triangularize the instantaneous coefficient matrix of an SVAR model

If this is right

  • Acyclicity is maintained automatically throughout optimization rather than enforced by an external penalty.
  • The entire causal discovery task becomes a single differentiable program amenable to standard gradient methods.
  • Empirical results show the best combined accuracy and runtime among twelve baselines on three real-world time-series benchmarks.
  • On the largest benchmark the method delivers more than a 6x reduction in computation time while preserving discovery quality.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same permutation parameterization could be tested on nonlinear instantaneous effects by replacing the linear SVAR coefficients with a neural-network block that respects the learned order.
  • Because the ordering is learned continuously rather than searched discretely, the approach may tolerate moderate amounts of missing observations better than combinatorial alternatives.
  • The technique supplies a template for converting other combinatorial constraints (for example, sparsity patterns or topological orders) into differentiable parameterizations in related structured prediction tasks.

Load-bearing premise

The permutation obtained from the Gumbel-Sinkhorn operator will continue to yield a valid acyclic triangularization of the instantaneous coefficient matrix at every point during gradient-based optimization.

What would settle it

If, after convergence, the triangularized instantaneous coefficient matrix still contains a cycle or the method fails to match or exceed the reported accuracy and 6x speedup on the three benchmarks, the central claim would be falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.03227 by Ce Guo, Emil Lupu, Ray Dipojjwal, Tong Zhao, Wayne Luk.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Illustration of acyclicity in time-series causal graphs, where nodes denote [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Ground truth causal graph for the MoM1 dataset. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Inferred causal graphs for the MoM1 dataset under different lag settings. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Causal discovery with instantaneous effects in multivariate time series is challenging, as the instantaneous structure must be acyclic. Prior methods enforce this by either separating instantaneous and lagged estimation into multi-stage pipelines or imposing algebraic acyclicity constraints via complex augmented Lagrangian optimization, both of which incur high computational cost. In this work, we propose a different approach: we learn a differentiable permutation of variables using the Gumbel--Sinkhorn operator and triangularize the instantaneous coefficient matrix of a Structural Vector Autoregressive (SVAR) model in the learned order. This converts acyclicity from a hard constraint into a parameterization and keeps it valid throughout optimization. In doing so, our method enables unified, continuous optimization with gradient-based learning, leading to improved efficiency in time--series causal discovery. Across three real-world benchmarks, our method achieves the best overall performance compared with 12 baselines in both discovery accuracy and efficiency. On the large-scale benchmark, it further demonstrates strong scalability, achieving more than a 6x speedup over competing methods.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes learning a differentiable permutation of variables via the Gumbel-Sinkhorn operator to triangularize the instantaneous coefficient matrix in an SVAR model for time-series causal discovery. This is presented as converting the acyclicity requirement from a hard constraint (e.g., via augmented Lagrangian) into a parameterization that remains valid throughout gradient-based optimization, enabling unified continuous optimization. The method is claimed to outperform 12 baselines in accuracy and efficiency across three real-world benchmarks, with >6x speedup on a large-scale benchmark.

Significance. If the central parameterization indeed maintains strict acyclicity throughout training and the reported gains are reproducible with proper controls, the approach could simplify and accelerate causal discovery for SVAR models by avoiding multi-stage pipelines or complex constrained optimization. The efficiency claims on large-scale data would be particularly notable if supported by ablations and statistical tests.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that the Gumbel-Sinkhorn parameterization 'converts acyclicity from a hard constraint into a parameterization and keeps it valid throughout optimization' is not obviously supported by the construction. The Gumbel-Sinkhorn operator produces a soft (doubly-stochastic) matrix during training; only in the zero-temperature limit does it approach a hard permutation. Consequently the reordered instantaneous matrix is only approximately triangular for most of gradient descent, so cycles may persist and the acyclicity guarantee is not strict. This directly affects the central methodological contribution and requires either a formal argument that the soft relaxation preserves acyclicity in the limit or empirical verification that the implied graph remains acyclic at convergence.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: performance claims (best overall vs. 12 baselines, 6x speedup) are stated without dataset descriptions, error bars, statistical significance tests, or ablation studies on the temperature schedule or permutation quality; these details are needed to assess reproducibility.
  2. The manuscript should clarify how the learned soft permutation is converted to a hard triangularization at inference time and whether any post-processing is required to enforce acyclicity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive comment on the acyclicity claim. We address the point directly below and outline revisions to improve clarity.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that the Gumbel-Sinkhorn parameterization 'converts acyclicity from a hard constraint into a parameterization and keeps it valid throughout optimization' is not obviously supported by the construction. The Gumbel-Sinkhorn operator produces a soft (doubly-stochastic) matrix during training; only in the zero-temperature limit does it approach a hard permutation. Consequently the reordered instantaneous matrix is only approximately triangular for most of gradient descent, so cycles may persist and the acyclicity guarantee is not strict. This directly affects the central methodological contribution and requires either a formal argument that the soft relaxation preserves acyclicity in the limit or empirical verification that the implied graph remains acyclic at convergence.

    Authors: We agree the original abstract wording is imprecise and could suggest a strict guarantee at every optimization step. The Gumbel-Sinkhorn operator parameterizes the space of permutations; the instantaneous matrix is reordered and triangularized by construction under this (soft) permutation. Strict acyclicity therefore holds exactly only upon convergence to a hard permutation matrix (zero-temperature limit). During training the structure is a continuous relaxation, which still removes the need for explicit algebraic constraints or multi-stage pipelines. We will revise the abstract to state that the parameterization converts acyclicity into a search over permutations with the guarantee holding at convergence. We will also add a short methods subsection on the relaxation, including the temperature annealing schedule, and report empirical verification that the final estimated graphs satisfy acyclicity (e.g., via the standard NOTEARS acyclicity function evaluated on the converged hard permutation). These changes clarify the contribution without altering the algorithm. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper proposes a new parameterization of acyclicity via Gumbel-Sinkhorn permutation learning to triangularize the SVAR instantaneous matrix, presented as converting a hard constraint into a differentiable form. No self-definitional reductions, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the abstract or described method. The central claim is an independent algorithmic contribution whose validity rests on the properties of the operator and optimization, not on re-deriving its own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that any instantaneous causal structure admits an acyclic ordering that can be recovered differentiably; no free parameters or invented entities are mentioned in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Instantaneous effects in the SVAR model admit a permutation that renders the coefficient matrix acyclic (triangular).
    Invoked when the abstract states that the learned permutation 'triangularize[s] the instantaneous coefficient matrix' to keep acyclicity valid throughout optimization.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5709 in / 1491 out tokens · 24739 ms · 2026-06-28T11:16:30.529286+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    In: The History and Development of Search Methods for Causal StructureWorkshopatthe39thConferenceonUncertaintyinArtificialIntelligence (2023)

    Aıt-Bachir, A., Assaad, C.K., de Bignicourt, C., Devijver, E., Ferreira, S., Gaussier, E., Mohanna, H., Zan, L.: Case studies of causal discovery from it monitoring time series, 2023. In: The History and Development of Search Methods for Causal StructureWorkshopatthe39thConferenceonUncertaintyinArtificialIntelligence (2023)

    2023

  2. [2]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems36, 1738–1763 (2023)

    Annadani, Y., Pawlowski, N., Jennings, J., Bauer, S., Zhang, C., Gong, W.: Bayes- dag: Gradient-based posterior inference for causal discovery. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems36, 1738–1763 (2023)

    2023

  3. [3]

    Learning Directed Acyclic Graphs with Penalized Neighbourhood Regression

    Aragam, B., Amini, A.A., Zhou, Q.: Learning directed acyclic graphs with penal- ized neighbourhood regression. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.08963 (2015)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  4. [4]

    In: Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence

    Assaad, C.K., Devijver, E., Gaussier, E.: Discovery of extended summary graphs in time series. In: Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence. pp. 96–106. Pmlr (2022)

    2022

  5. [5]

    Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research73, 767–819 (2022)

    Assaad, C.K., Devijver, E., Gaussier, E.: Survey and evaluation of causal discovery methods for time series. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research73, 767–819 (2022)

    2022

  6. [6]

    Journal of neuroscience methods223, 50–68 (2014)

    Barnett, L., Seth, A.K.: The mvgc multivariate granger causality toolbox: a new approach to granger-causal inference. Journal of neuroscience methods223, 50–68 (2014)

    2014

  7. [7]

    Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics 81(4), 041907 (2010)

    Barrett, A.B., Barnett, L., Seth, A.K.: Multivariate granger causality and general- ized variance. Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics 81(4), 041907 (2010)

    2010

  8. [8]

    In: In- ternational Conference on Learning Representations (2022),https://openreview

    Charpentier, B., Kibler, S., Günnemann, S.: Differentiable DAG sampling. In: In- ternational Conference on Learning Representations (2022),https://openreview. net/forum?id=9wOQOgNe-w

    2022

  9. [9]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.08787 (2024) Learning Temporal Causal Structure via Smooth Differentiable Optimization 15

    Chevalley, M., Mehrjou, A., Schwab, P.: Efficient differentiable discovery of causal order. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.08787 (2024) Learning Temporal Causal Structure via Smooth Differentiable Optimization 15

    work page arXiv 2024

  10. [10]

    Oxford Bulletin of Economics and statistics65, 745–767 (2003)

    Demiralp, S., Hoover, K.D.: Searching for the causal structure of a vector autore- gression. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and statistics65, 745–767 (2003)

    2003

  11. [11]

    Prob- abilistic graphical models16(2010)

    Entner, D., Hoyer, P.O.: On causal discovery from time series data using fci. Prob- abilistic graphical models16(2010)

    2010

  12. [12]

    Advances in neural information processing systems 33, 12615–12625 (2020)

    Gerhardus, A., Runge, J.: High-recall causal discovery for autocorrelated time se- ries with latent confounders. Advances in neural information processing systems 33, 12615–12625 (2020)

    2020

  13. [13]

    In: The Thirteenth In- ternational Conference on Learning Representations (2025),https://openreview

    Gideon, S., Maha, S., Jan, B., Niklas, P., Joachim, D.: Causalrivers - scaling up benchmarking of causal discovery for real-world time-series. In: The Thirteenth In- ternational Conference on Learning Representations (2025),https://openreview. net/forum?id=wmV4cIbgl6

    2025

  14. [14]

    ACM Computing Surveys57(4), 1–38 (2024)

    Gong,C.,Zhang,C.,Yao,D.,Bi,J.,Li,W.,Xu,Y.:Causaldiscoveryfromtemporal data: An overview and new perspectives. ACM Computing Surveys57(4), 1–38 (2024)

    2024

  15. [15]

    Econometrica: journal of the Econometric Society pp

    Granger, C.W.: Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross- spectral methods. Econometrica: journal of the Econometric Society pp. 424–438 (1969)

    1969

  16. [16]

    In: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM/SIGDA International Symposium on Field-Programmable Gate Arrays

    Guo, C., Luk, W.: Accelerating constraint-based causal discovery by shifting speed bottleneck. In: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM/SIGDA International Symposium on Field-Programmable Gate Arrays. pp. 169–179 (2022)

    2022

  17. [17]

    Cambridge University Press (2001)

    Hoover, K.D.: Causality in macroeconomics. Cambridge University Press (2001)

    2001

  18. [18]

    Journal of Machine Learning Research11(5) (2010)

    Hyvärinen, A., Zhang, K., Shimizu, S., Hoyer, P.O.: Estimation of a structural vector autoregression model using non-gaussianity. Journal of Machine Learning Research11(5) (2010)

    2010

  19. [19]

    In: International conference on machine learning

    Jaggi, M.: Revisiting frank-wolfe: Projection-free sparse convex optimization. In: International conference on machine learning. pp. 427–435. PMLR (2013)

    2013

  20. [20]

    Econometric theory 22(5), 961–967 (2006)

    Kilian, L.: New introduction to multiple time series analysis. Econometric theory 22(5), 961–967 (2006)

    2006

  21. [21]

    Journal of Econometrics196(2), 288–304 (2017)

    Lanne, M., Meitz, M., Saikkonen, P.: Identification and estimation of non-gaussian structural vector autoregressions. Journal of Econometrics196(2), 288–304 (2017)

    2017

  22. [22]

    In: Independent component analysis: Theory and applications, pp

    Lee, T.W.: Independent component analysis. In: Independent component analysis: Theory and applications, pp. 27–66. Springer (1998)

    1998

  23. [23]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.14161 (2023)

    Maiti, R.R., Adepu, S., Lupu, E.: Iccps: Impact discovery using causal inference for cyber attacks in cpss. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.14161 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  24. [24]

    In: International Conference on Learning Repre- sentations (2018),https://openreview.net/forum?id=Byt3oJ-0W

    Mena, G., Belanger, D., Linderman, S., Snoek, J.: Learning latent permutations with gumbel-sinkhorn networks. In: International Conference on Learning Repre- sentations (2018),https://openreview.net/forum?id=Byt3oJ-0W

    2018

  25. [25]

    In: Causal Learning and Reasoning

    Mogensen, S.W., Rathsman, K., Nilsson, P.: Causal discovery in a complex indus- trial system: A time series benchmark. In: Causal Learning and Reasoning. pp. 1218–1236. PMLR (2024)

    2024

  26. [26]

    In: 9th Joint International Conference on Information Sciences (JCIS-06)

    Moneta, A., Spirtes, P.: Graphical models for the identification of causal struc- tures in multivariate time series models. In: 9th Joint International Conference on Information Sciences (JCIS-06). pp. 613–616. Atlantis press (2006)

    2006

  27. [27]

    In: Pro- ceedings of the 26th annual international conference on machine learning

    Mooij, J., Janzing, D., Peters, J., Schölkopf, B.: Regression by dependence mini- mization and its application to causal inference in additive noise models. In: Pro- ceedings of the 26th annual international conference on machine learning. pp. 745– 752 (2009)

    2009

  28. [28]

    Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction1(1), 19 (2019) 16 T

    Nauta, M., Bucur, D., Seifert, C.: Causal discovery with attention-based convo- lutional neural networks. Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction1(1), 19 (2019) 16 T. Zhao et al

    2019

  29. [29]

    numerical methods for nonlinear continuous op- timization

    Nemirovsky, A.: Optimization ii. numerical methods for nonlinear continuous op- timization. Technion–Israel Institute of Technology (1999)

    1999

  30. [30]

    Springer (2006)

    Nocedal, J., Wright, S.J.: Numerical optimization. Springer (2006)

    2006

  31. [31]

    In:InternationalConferenceonArtificialIntelligenceandStatistics.pp.1595–1605

    Pamfil, R., Sriwattanaworachai, N., Desai, S., Pilgerstorfer, P., Georgatzis, K., Beaumont, P., Aragam, B.: Dynotears: Structure learning from time-series data. In:InternationalConferenceonArtificialIntelligenceandStatistics.pp.1595–1605. Pmlr (2020)

    2020

  32. [32]

    Biometrika101(1), 219–228 (2014)

    Peters, J., Bühlmann, P.: Identifiability of gaussian structural equation models with equal error variances. Biometrika101(1), 219–228 (2014)

    2014

  33. [33]

    Advances in neural information processing systems26(2013)

    Peters, J., Janzing, D., Scholkopf, B.: Causal inference on time series using re- stricted structural equation models. Advances in neural information processing systems26(2013)

    2013

  34. [34]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems34, 27772–27784 (2021)

    Reisach,A.,Seiler,C.,Weichwald,S.:Bewareofthesimulateddag!causaldiscovery benchmarks may be easy to game. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems34, 27772–27784 (2021)

    2021

  35. [35]

    In: Conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence

    Runge, J.: Discovering contemporaneous and lagged causal relations in autocor- related nonlinear time series datasets. In: Conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence. pp. 1388–1397. Pmlr (2020)

    2020

  36. [36]

    Nature communications10(1), 2553 (2019)

    Runge, J., Bathiany, S., Bollt, E., Camps-Valls, G., Coumou, D., Deyle, E., Gly- mour, C., Kretschmer, M., Mahecha, M.D., Munoz-Mari, J., et al.: Inferring cau- sation from time series in earth system sciences. Nature communications10(1), 2553 (2019)

    2019

  37. [37]

    Science advances5(11), eaau4996 (2019)

    Runge, J., Nowack, P., Kretschmer, M., Flaxman, S., Sejdinovic, D.: Detecting and quantifying causal associations in large nonlinear time series datasets. Science advances5(11), eaau4996 (2019)

    2019

  38. [38]

    Journal of Machine Learning Research 7(10) (2006)

    Shimizu, S., Hoyer, P.O., Hyvärinen, A., Kerminen, A., Jordan, M.: A linear non- gaussian acyclic model for causal discovery. Journal of Machine Learning Research 7(10) (2006)

    2006

  39. [39]

    Journal of Machine Learning Research-JMLR12(Apr), 1225–1248 (2011)

    Shimizu, S., Inazumi, T., Sogawa, Y., Hyvarinen, A., Kawahara, Y., Washio, T., Hoyer, P.O., Bollen, K., Hoyer, P.: Directlingam: A direct method for learning a linear non-gaussian structural equation model. Journal of Machine Learning Research-JMLR12(Apr), 1225–1248 (2011)

    2011

  40. [40]

    Econometrica: journal of the Econometric Society pp

    Sims, C.A.: Macroeconomics and reality. Econometrica: journal of the Econometric Society pp. 1–48 (1980)

    1980

  41. [41]

    Journal of the American Statistical Association92(437), 357–367 (1997)

    Swanson, N.R., Granger, C.W.: Impulse response functions based on a causal approach to residual orthogonalization in vector autoregressions. Journal of the American Statistical Association92(437), 357–367 (1997)

    1997

  42. [42]

    IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence44(8), 4267–4279 (2021)

    Tank, A., Covert, I., Foti, N., Shojaie, A., Fox, E.B.: Neural granger causality. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence44(8), 4267–4279 (2021)

    2021

  43. [43]

    In: Meila, M., Zhang, T

    Yu, Y., Gao, T., Yin, N., Ji, Q.: Dags with no curl: An efficient dag structure learning approach. In: Meila, M., Zhang, T. (eds.) Proceedings of the 38th Inter- national Conference on Machine Learning. Proceedings of Machine Learning Re- search, vol. 139, pp. 12156–12166 (2021),https://proceedings.mlr.press/v139/ yu21a.html

    2021

  44. [44]

    Zheng, X., Aragam, B., Ravikumar, P.K., Xing, E.P.: Dags with no tears: Continu- ous optimization for structure learning. Advances in neural information processing systems31(2018) Learning Temporal Causal Structure via Smooth Differentiable Optimization 17 A Appendix A.1 Preprocessing For all datasets, we preprocess the raw data by removing timestamps to ...

    2018