Causal discovery from unstructured data is a challenging yet underexplored task in high-expertise domains such as healthcare, finance, and education. Existing methods typically leverage the general knowledge of large language models (LLMs) to identify causal factors from unstructured data and annotate them into structured data for causal graph construction. However, they remain limited by two key challenges (CHs): (CH1) insufficient identification of latent factors, which are implicit in the data yet essential for causal discovery, due to the lack of domain-specific knowledge; and (CH2) unreliable factor annotation, caused by the lack of domain-grounded reasoning, which propagates errors to the resulting causal graphs. To address these challenges, we introduce a novel Domain Knowledge-enhanced Causal Discovery framework (DKCD) for causal discovery from unstructured data in high-expertise domains with three interconnected components: (1) Knowledge Mining: It retrieves relevant domain knowledge based on observable factors to support subsequent causal reasoning. (2) Knowledge-guided Causal Reasoning: Reasoning with relevant knowledge, it discovers latent causal factors to address CH1 and generates key causal clues for more accurate data annotation to address CH2. (3) Causal Structure Discovery: It constructs the final causal graphs based on a more complete factor set and accurate annotations. Experiments on two domain-specific datasets show that DKCD significantly improves both causal factor identification and causal graph construction.
In 2011, Judea Pearl received the Turing Award, considered the Nobel Prize in Computing, for fundamental contributions to artificial intelligence through the development of a calculus for probabilistic and causal reasoning. It includes pioneering the development of causal discovery algorithms. These computer algorithms can analyze large multivariate datasets and automatically discover the causal relationships among the constituent variables. They have been widely used in many critical fields such as medicine and economics to support decisions. However, to our knowledge, they have not been leveraged in law. This paper attempts to alleviate this gap by investigating whether causal discovery algorithms can be leveraged for automated generation of legal arguments. To that end, a novel legal dataset is prepared by identifying 17 legal concepts, such as physical assault and property dispute. A curated collection of 150 homicide cases are annotated with these concepts, e.g., a case is annotated with physical assault only if a physical assault had been reported in that case. Subsequently, a selected set of widely-used causal discovery algorithms is applied to the annotated dataset to discover the causal relationships between the legal concepts. Additionally, the degrees of belief associated with the discovered relationships are quantified in mathematical probabilities. It is shown that some of the causal relationships help generate viable legal arguments, e.g., if one could establish that a physical assault has not taken place during a homicide, it should be a sufficient condition (with probability 1) to establish that the homicide has not been committed due to a property-related dispute. Thus, this paper shows that causal discovery algorithms can be helpful in generating legal arguments, opening up avenues for promising future endeavors.