Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Algorithms for reliable decision-making need causal reasoning

Decision-making inherently involves cause–effect relationships that introduce causal challenges. We argue that reliable algorithms for decision-making need to build upon causal reasoning. Addressing these causal challenges requires explicit assumptions about the underlying causal structure to ensure identifiability and estimatability, which means that the computational methods must successfully align with decision-making objectives in real-world tasks.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Automated decision-making requires causal assumptions to ensure reliable decisions.

References

  1. Corbett-Davies, S., Pierson, E., Feller, A., Goel, S. & Huq, A. Algorithmic decision making and the cost of fairness. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 797–806 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2017).

  2. Dulac-Arnold, G. et al. Mach. Learn. 110, 2419–2468 (2021).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Obermeyer, Z., Powers, B., Vogeli, C. & Mullainathan, S. Science 366, 447–453 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Pearl, J. Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2009).

  5. Feuerriegel, S. et al. Nat. Med. 30, 958–968 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Manski, C. F. Identification for Prediction and Decision (Harvard Univ. Press, 2009).

  7. Dawid, P. J. Causal Inference 9, 39–77 (2021).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Coston, C., Mishler, A., Kennedy, E. H. & Chouldechova, A. Counterfactual risk assessments, evaluation, and fairness. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT*), 582–593 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2020).

  9. Kleinberg, J., Ludwig, J., Mullainathan, S. & Obermeyer, Z. Am. Econ. Rev. 105, 491–495 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Heaven, W. D. The complex math of counterfactuals could help Spotify pick your next favorite song. MIT Technology Review (4 April 2023).

  11. Bareinboim, E. & Pearl, J. Proc. AAAI Conf. Artificial Intelligence 26, 698–704 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kallus, N. & Zhou, A. Confounding-robust policy improvement. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 31 (NeurIPS) (eds Bengio, S. et al.) (Curran Associates, Inc., 2018).

  13. Richens, J. & Everitt, T. Robust agents learn causal world models. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR, 2024).

  14. Perdomo, J., Zrnic, T., Mendler-Dünner, C. & Hardt, M. Performative prediction. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (eds Daumé, H. III & Singh, A.) 7599–7609 (PMLR, 2020).

  15. Gamella, J. L., Peters, J. & Bühlmann, P. Nat. Mach. Intell. 7, 107–118 (2025).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the DAAD program Konrad Zuse Schools of Excellence in Artificial Intelligence, sponsored by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Conceptualization and writing (original draft): C.K., U.F.-A., S.F.; writing (original draft): J.S., D.F.; supervision and writing (reviewing and editing): R.G., M.v.d.S., F.K.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christoph Kern.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Computational Science thanks Stefan Lessmann and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kern, C., Fischer-Abaigar, U., Schweisthal, J. et al. Algorithms for reliable decision-making need causal reasoning. Nat Comput Sci 5, 356–360 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43588-025-00814-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43588-025-00814-9

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing AI and Robotics

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: AI and Robotics newsletter — what matters in AI and robotics research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: AI and Robotics