Notice: The reproducibility variables underlying each score are classified using an automated LLM-based pipeline, validated against a manually labeled dataset. LLM-based classification introduces uncertainty and potential bias; scores should be interpreted as estimates. Full accuracy metrics and methodology are described in Coakley et alK. L. Coakley, T. Snelleman, H. Hoos, and O. E. Gundersen, "The embrace of open science: An analysis of a decade of AI research and 56 800 conference papers," Under Review, 2026..

A Versatile Causal Discovery Framework to Allow Causally-Related Hidden Variables

Authors: Xinshuai Dong, Biwei Huang, Ignavier Ng, Xiangchen Song, Yujia Zheng, Songyao Jin, Roberto Legaspi, Peter Spirtes, Kun Zhang

ICLR 2024 | Venue PDF | LLM Run Details

Reproducibility Variable Result LLM Response
Research Type Experimental Experimental results on both synthetic and real-world personality data sets demonstrate the efficacy of the proposed approach in finite-sample cases. Our code will be publicly available. 6 EXPERIMENTS We validate our method using both synthetic and real-life data.
Researcher Affiliation Collaboration 1Carnegie Mellon University 2University of California San Diego 3KDDI Research 4Mohamed bin Zayed University of Artificial Intelligence
Pseudocode Yes Algorithm 1: The overall procedure for Rank-based Latent Causal Discovery (RLCD).
Open Source Code No Our code will be publicly available.
Open Datasets Yes real-world Big Five Personality dataset https://openpsychometrics.org/.
Dataset Splits No No specific information regarding training/validation/test dataset splits (e.g., percentages or sample counts) is provided in the paper.
Hardware Specification Yes We conduct all the experiments with single Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2470.
Software Dependencies No Our code is implemented with Python 3.7.
Experiment Setup Yes the hyperparameter α is chosen from {0.1, 0.05, 0.01, 0.005} in favor of each method to ensure their best performance and thus a fair comparison. For the proposed method we employ α = 0.005 for the procedure of finding latent variables, while for the first stage we empirically find that using a rather big α would be better.