BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Jonas Peters

Jonas Peters contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
MethodologyMachine Learningmath.STStatistics TheoryArtificial IntelligenceApplicationsecon.EMeess.SYmath.DSRoboticsSystems and Control

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
13works
0followers
11topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

13 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

FLUXtrapolation: A benchmark on extrapolating ecosystem fluxes

We introduce FLUXtrapolation, a benchmark for extrapolating ecosystem fluxes under progressively harder distribution shifts. Ecosystem fluxes are central to understanding the carbon, water, and energy cycles, yet they can only be measured directly at sparsely located measurement towers. Producing global flux estimates therefore requires training models on observed sites using globally available covariates and predicting in unobserved regions, that is, upscaling. Flux upscaling is a challenging domain generalization problem that is affected by a shift in covariate distribution across climates, ecosystem types, and environmental conditions, as well as by conditional shift: important drivers remain unobserved at global scale. We provide a quantitative analysis of both these shifts in $P_X$ and $P_{Y\mid X}$. FLUXtrapolation is designed based on domain expertise on flux upscaling: it defines temporal, spatial, and temperature-based extrapolation scenarios and evaluates performance across held-out domains, temporal aggregations, and tail errors. In a pilot study, we find that baselines perform similarly under median hourly RMSE, but separate under the proposed tail-focused and multi-scale evaluation. FLUXtrapolation therefore poses a realistic and thus relevant challenge for machine learning methods under distribution shift; at the same time, progress on this benchmark would directly support the scientific goal of improving flux upscaling.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2026arXiv

Prediction-Intervention Games and Invariant Sets

We consider the following two-player game: using observational data, the leader chooses a prediction function for a response variable $Y$ from given covariates. The follower then reacts with an intervention on some covariates in the underlying structural causal model to maximize their own objective. The leader knows the intervention targets, but may have limited knowledge of the follower's objective. We call this setup a prediction-intervention game, a special case of a Stackelberg game. Finding an optimal strategy for the leader is generally difficult. To avoid severe performance loss, the leader may base their prediction on the causal parents of $Y$, or more generally on an invariant subset of covariates. We prove, for two common classes of follower objectives, that predictors based on the stable blanket, a specific invariant subset, are always better or as good as those based on the causal parents. We further upper bound the leader's post-intervention risk by a worst-case risk over allowed interventions and strengthen existing distribution generalization results to analyze this bound: we give sufficient conditions under which stable-blanket predictors are worst-case optimal, and show by examples that these conditions cannot in general be dropped. Finally, we discuss practical strategies for settings with known and unknown graph, and test them on simulated and real-world data.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Distributional robustness of K-class estimators and the PULSE

While causal models are robust in that they are prediction optimal under arbitrarily strong interventions, they may not be optimal when the interventions are bounded. We prove that the classical K-class estimator satisfies such optimality by establishing a connection between K-class estimators and anchor regression. This connection further motivates a novel estimator in instrumental variable settings that minimizes the mean squared prediction error subject to the constraint that the estimator lies in an asymptotically valid confidence region of the causal coefficient. We call this estimator PULSE (p-uncorrelated least squares estimator), relate it to work on invariance, show that it can be computed efficiently as a data-driven K-class estimator, even though the underlying optimization problem is non-convex, and prove consistency. We evaluate the estimators on real data and perform simulation experiments illustrating that PULSE suffers from less variability. There are several settings including weak instrument settings, where it outperforms other estimators.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Invariant Ancestry Search

Recently, methods have been proposed that exploit the invariance of prediction models with respect to changing environments to infer subsets of the causal parents of a response variable. If the environments influence only few of the underlying mechanisms, the subset identified by invariant causal prediction (ICP), for example, may be small, or even empty. We introduce the concept of minimal invariance and propose invariant ancestry search (IAS). In its population version, IAS outputs a set which contains only ancestors of the response and is a superset of the output of ICP. When applied to data, corresponding guarantees hold asymptotically if the underlying test for invariance has asymptotic level and power. We develop scalable algorithms and perform experiments on simulated and real data.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Learning by Doing: Controlling a Dynamical System using Causality, Control, and Reinforcement Learning

Questions in causality, control, and reinforcement learning go beyond the classical machine learning task of prediction under i.i.d. observations. Instead, these fields consider the problem of learning how to actively perturb a system to achieve a certain effect on a response variable. Arguably, they have complementary views on the problem: In control, one usually aims to first identify the system by excitation strategies to then apply model-based design techniques to control the system. In (non-model-based) reinforcement learning, one directly optimizes a reward. In causality, one focus is on identifiability of causal structure. We believe that combining the different views might create synergies and this competition is meant as a first step toward such synergies. The participants had access to observational and (offline) interventional data generated by dynamical systems. Track CHEM considers an open-loop problem in which a single impulse at the beginning of the dynamics can be set, while Track ROBO considers a closed-loop problem in which control variables can be set at each time step. The goal in both tracks is to infer controls that drive the system to a desired state. Code is open-sourced ( https://github.com/LearningByDoingCompetition/learningbydoing-comp ) to reproduce the winning solutions of the competition and to facilitate trying out new methods on the competition tasks.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Statistical Testing under Distributional Shifts

In this work, we introduce statistical testing under distributional shifts. We are interested in the hypothesis $P^* \in H_0$ for a target distribution $P^*$, but observe data from a different distribution $Q^*$. We assume that $P^*$ is related to $Q^*$ through a known shift $τ$ and formally introduce hypothesis testing in this setting. We propose a general testing procedure that first resamples from the observed data to construct an auxiliary data set and then applies an existing test in the target domain. We prove that if the size of the resample is at most $o(\sqrt{n})$ and the resampling weights are well-behaved, this procedure inherits the pointwise asymptotic level and power from the target test. If the map $τ$ is estimated from data, we can maintain the above guarantees under mild conditions if the estimation works sufficiently well. We further extend our results to finite sample level, uniform asymptotic level and a different resampling scheme. Testing under distributional shifts allows us to tackle a diverse set of problems. We argue that it may prove useful in reinforcement learning and covariate shift, we show how it reduces conditional to unconditional independence testing and we provide example applications in causal inference.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Structure Learning for Directed Trees

Knowing the causal structure of a system is of fundamental interest in many areas of science and can aid the design of prediction algorithms that work well under manipulations to the system. The causal structure becomes identifiable from the observational distribution under certain restrictions. To learn the structure from data, score-based methods evaluate different graphs according to the quality of their fits. However, for large, continuous, and nonlinear models, these rely on heuristic optimization approaches with no general guarantees of recovering the true causal structure. In this paper, we consider structure learning of directed trees. We propose a fast and scalable method based on Chu-Liu-Edmonds' algorithm we call causal additive trees (CAT). For the case of Gaussian errors, we prove consistency in an asymptotic regime with a vanishing identifiability gap. We also introduce two methods for testing substructure hypotheses with asymptotic family-wise error rate control that is valid post-selection and in unidentified settings. Furthermore, we study the identifiability gap, which quantifies how much better the true causal model fits the observational distribution, and prove that it is lower bounded by local properties of the causal model. Simulation studies demonstrate the favorable performance of CAT compared to competing structure learning methods.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

The Hardness of Conditional Independence Testing and the Generalised Covariance Measure

It is a common saying that testing for conditional independence, i.e., testing whether whether two random vectors $X$ and $Y$ are independent, given $Z$, is a hard statistical problem if $Z$ is a continuous random variable (or vector). In this paper, we prove that conditional independence is indeed a particularly difficult hypothesis to test for. Valid statistical tests are required to have a size that is smaller than a predefined significance level, and different tests usually have power against a different class of alternatives. We prove that a valid test for conditional independence does not have power against any alternative. Given the non-existence of a uniformly valid conditional independence test, we argue that tests must be designed so their suitability for a particular problem may be judged easily. To address this need, we propose in the case where $X$ and $Y$ are univariate to nonlinearly regress $X$ on $Z$, and $Y$ on $Z$ and then compute a test statistic based on the sample covariance between the residuals, which we call the generalised covariance measure (GCM). We prove that validity of this form of test relies almost entirely on the weak requirement that the regression procedures are able to estimate the conditional means $X$ given $Z$, and $Y$ given $Z$, at a slow rate. We extend the methodology to handle settings where $X$ and $Y$ may be multivariate or even high-dimensional. While our general procedure can be tailored to the setting at hand by combining it with any regression technique, we develop the theoretical guarantees for kernel ridge regression. A simulation study shows that the test based on GCM is competitive with state of the art conditional independence tests. Code is available as the R package GeneralisedCovarianceMeasure on CRAN.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Towards Causal Inference for Spatio-Temporal Data: Conflict and Forest Loss in Colombia

In many data scientific problems, we are interested in inferring causal relationships in the data generating mechanism. Here, we consider the following real-world question: how has the Colombian conflict influenced tropical forest loss? There is evidence for both enhancing and reducing impacts. Answering such questions requires the use of causal models. In this work, we propose a class of causal models for spatio-temporal stochastic processes. It allows us to formally define and quantify the causal effect of a vector of covariates $X$ on a real-valued response $Y$, even if the causal background knowledge is incomplete. We introduce a procedure for estimating causal effects, and a non-parametric hypothesis test for these effects being zero. The proposed methods do not make strong distributional assumptions, and allow for arbitrarily many latent confounders, given that these confounders do not vary across time (or, alternatively, they do not vary across space). When applying our causal methodology to the problem of conflict and forest loss, using data from 2000 to 2018, we find a reducing but insignificant causal effect of conflict on forest loss. Regionally, both enhancing and reducing effects can be identified. Our theoretical findings are supported by simulations, and code is available online.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Anchor regression: heterogeneous data meets causality

We consider the problem of predicting a response variable from a set of covariates on a data set that differs in distribution from the training data. Causal parameters are optimal in terms of predictive accuracy if in the new distribution either many variables are affected by interventions or only some variables are affected, but the perturbations are strong. If the training and test distributions differ by a shift, causal parameters might be too conservative to perform well on the above task. This motivates anchor regression, a method that makes use of exogeneous variables to solve a relaxation of the causal minimax problem by considering a modification of the least-squares loss. The procedure naturally provides an interpolation between the solutions of ordinary least squares and two-stage least squares. We prove that the estimator satisfies predictive guarantees in terms of distributional robustness against shifts in a linear class; these guarantees are valid even if the instrumental variables assumptions are violated. If anchor regression and least squares provide the same answer (anchor stability), we establish that OLS parameters are invariant under certain distributional changes. Anchor regression is shown empirically to improve replicability and protect against distributional shifts.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Causal discovery in heavy-tailed models

Causal questions are omnipresent in many scientific problems. While much progress has been made in the analysis of causal relationships between random variables, these methods are not well suited if the causal mechanisms only manifest themselves in extremes. This work aims to connect the two fields of causal inference and extreme value theory. We define the causal tail coefficient that captures asymmetries in the extremal dependence of two random variables. In the population case, the causal tail coefficient is shown to reveal the causal structure if the distribution follows a linear structural causal model. This holds even in the presence of latent common causes that have the same tail index as the observed variables. Based on a consistent estimator of the causal tail coefficient, we propose a computationally highly efficient algorithm that estimates the causal structure. We prove that our method consistently recovers the causal order and we compare it to other well-established and non-extremal approaches in causal discovery on synthetic and real data. The code is available as an open-access R package.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Causal models for dynamical systems

A probabilistic model describes a system in its observational state. In many situations, however, we are interested in the system's response under interventions. The class of structural causal models provides a language that allows us to model the behaviour under interventions. It can been taken as a starting point to answer a plethora of causal questions, including the identification of causal effects or causal structure learning. In this chapter, we provide a natural and straight-forward extension of this concept to dynamical systems, focusing on continuous time models. In particular, we introduce two types of causal kinetic models that differ in how the randomness enters into the model: it may either be considered as observational noise or as systematic driving noise. In both cases, we define interventions and therefore provide a possible starting point for causal inference. In this sense, the book chapter provides more questions than answers. The focus of the proposed causal kinetic models lies on the dynamics themselves rather than corresponding stationary distributions, for example. We believe that this is beneficial when the aim is to model the full time evolution of the system and data are measured at different time points. Under this focus, it is natural to consider interventions in the differential equations themselves.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Switching Regression Models and Causal Inference in the Presence of Discrete Latent Variables

Given a response $Y$ and a vector $X = (X^1, \dots, X^d)$ of $d$ predictors, we investigate the problem of inferring direct causes of $Y$ among the vector $X$. Models for $Y$ that use all of its causal covariates as predictors enjoy the property of being invariant across different environments or interventional settings. Given data from such environments, this property has been exploited for causal discovery. Here, we extend this inference principle to situations in which some (discrete-valued) direct causes of $ Y $ are unobserved. Such cases naturally give rise to switching regression models. We provide sufficient conditions for the existence, consistency and asymptotic normality of the MLE in linear switching regression models with Gaussian noise, and construct a test for the equality of such models. These results allow us to prove that the proposed causal discovery method obtains asymptotic false discovery control under mild conditions. We provide an algorithm, make available code, and test our method on simulated data. It is robust against model violations and outperforms state-of-the-art approaches. We further apply our method to a real data set, where we show that it does not only output causal predictors, but also a process-based clustering of data points, which could be of additional interest to practitioners.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access