Paper detail

PRCD-MAP: Learning How Much to Trust Imperfect Priors in Causal Discovery

External priors of unknown reliability create a brittle trade-off in causal discovery: blind trust amplifies errors, blind rejection wastes signal. Real priors are also heterogeneously reliable -- physical laws are trustworthy, LLM-suggested edges are speculative -- yet existing methods either ignore priors or impose them through globally uniform trust. We propose PRCD-MAP, a soft prior-consumption layer that assigns per-edge trust to an imperfect prior and uses it to modulate a prior-aware $\ell_1$ and prior-weighted $\ell_2$ regularizer in a MAP objective. Trust is calibrated by empirical Bayes on a Laplace-approximated marginal likelihood and propagated along the prior graph by an MLP, so data-confirmed neighborhoods boost trust and contradictions suppress it. PRCD-MAP enjoys a population-level safety guarantee: it is $\varepsilon$-safe in expectation over the prior-generation distribution, with $\varepsilon\leq C\cdot\mathrm{acc}(1{-}\mathrm{acc})\cdot d^2/T$ at the parametric $T^{-1}$ rate and vanishing at the prior-quality endpoints. When the prior is uninformative, learned trust provably collapses to its floor and the method recovers a no-prior baseline. Empirically, on real CausalTime data PRCD-MAP exploits informative LLM priors (LLM-prior gain $+0.067/+0.089$ AUROC on AQI/Medical over a no-prior PRCD-MAP backbone; combined backbone+prior lead $+0.123/+0.043$ over PCMCI+), auto-attenuates on the anonymous-variable Traffic stress test, and retains a lead at $d{=}300$; against BayesDAG, the closest soft-Bayesian baseline, PRCD-MAP wins on every CausalTime dataset under a matched $W_0$-only protocol. A four-way ablation isolates each component: EB calibration and MLP trust propagation jointly carry the plurality of the gain, with positive sign on every dataset. Extensions to nonlinear (NAM) and cross-sectional settings show the calibrated-trust principle is setting-agnostic.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.