FADO: Learning Causal Explanations with Prior-Fitted Networks
Seth Flaxman
RPTU Kaiserslautern-Landau
(hosted by Krishna Gummadi)
(hosted by Krishna Gummadi)
12 Nov 2026, 12:15 pm - 1:15 pm
Kaiserslautern building MPI-SWS, Paul Ehrlich Str. Building 26, room 111
AICS-SOUNDS Joint Lecture Series
In regression and classification tasks with tabular datasets, most of the
literature on explanation in ML (e.g. SHAP, permutation importance) has focused
on predictive attribution: does feature X_i help predict outcome Y? At its
heart, predictive attribution captures correlation, not causation. We instead
ask a causal question: would manipulating feature X_i change outcome Y? We
define a natural quantity to answer this question, the feature intervention
effect: Δ_i = E[Y | do(X_i=+1)] − E[Y | do(X_i=−1)]. ...
In regression and classification tasks with tabular datasets, most of the
literature on explanation in ML (e.g. SHAP, permutation importance) has focused
on predictive attribution: does feature X_i help predict outcome Y? At its
heart, predictive attribution captures correlation, not causation. We instead
ask a causal question: would manipulating feature X_i change outcome Y? We
define a natural quantity to answer this question, the feature intervention
effect: Δ_i = E[Y | do(X_i=+1)] − E[Y | do(X_i=−1)]. In general, estimating
this quantity from observational data alone would entail strong causal
assumptions. We propose FADO (Feature-wise Amortized Do-Operators), an
amortized inference method using prior-fitted networks trained on synthetic
tabular datasets generated by structural causal models. During training, the
synthetic data generating process is known, so we can compute ground truth
intervention effects Δ_i, and train a model to predict them at test time from a
purely observational tabular dataset. As we demonstrate through extensive
experiments, our new causal explainability method is easy to train and provides
better explanations under a range of settings for which standard predictive
attribution fails, including proxy variables, confounders, colliders, and
placebos. We evaluate it on real, synthetic and semi-synthetic datasets, with
and without hidden confounders, and compare it to existing predictive
attribution methods and state-of-the-art causal inference methods.
Read more