Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Can Large Language Models Help Experimental Design for Causal Discovery?

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

arxiv 2503.01139 v2 pith:LFGLPCCH submitted 2025-03-03 cs.AI cs.LGstat.ME

classification cs.AIcs.LGstat.ME
keywords causaldiscoveryinterventiondatallmsapproachesdesignexperimental
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Designing proper experiments and selecting optimal intervention targets is a longstanding problem in scientific or causal discovery. Identifying the underlying causal structure from observational data alone is inherently difficult. Obtaining interventional data, on the other hand, is crucial to causal discovery, yet it is usually expensive and time-consuming to gather sufficient interventional data to facilitate causal discovery. Previous approaches commonly utilize uncertainty or gradient signals to determine the intervention targets. However, numerical-based approaches may yield suboptimal results due to the inaccurate estimation of the guiding signals at the beginning when with limited interventional data. In this work, we investigate a different approach, whether we can leverage Large Language Models (LLMs) to assist with the intervention targeting in causal discovery by making use of the rich world knowledge about the experimental design in LLMs. Specifically, we present Large Language Model Guided Intervention Targeting (LeGIT) -- a robust framework that effectively incorporates LLMs to augment existing numerical approaches for the intervention targeting in causal discovery. Across 4 realistic benchmark scales, LeGIT demonstrates significant improvements and robustness over existing methods and even surpasses humans, which demonstrates the usefulness of LLMs in assisting with experimental design for scientific discovery.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. LLM Cannot Discover Causality, and Should Be Restricted to Non-Decisional Support in Causal Discovery

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLMs are unreliable causal reasoners, so they should be limited to non-decisional search support in causal discovery algorithms.

Pith tools