IP Library Granted Patent US 12,602,589
Granted Patent B2
US 12,602,589 · App. 17/748,891 · Granted Apr 14, 2026

Causal inference via neuroevolutionary selection

Inventors: Michael Craig Burkhart (Plainfield, IN); Gabriel Ruiz (Jurupa Valley, CA)
Assignee: Adobe Inc.
G06N3/086
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,602,589
App. No.
17/748,891
Granted
Apr 14, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

The technology is directed towards receiving training data regarding a set of observations. Each observation includes a feature set, a treatment, and an outcome. A first generation of machine learning models is trained, via the training data, to predict an outcome for a feature set of a given observation. A new generation of models is generated by selecting a subset of models from the trained first generation of models based on a fitness criteria of each model to generate an intermediate layer for use in predicting a treatment. An algorithm is applied to the selected subset of models to generate the new generation of models. Transformed training data is generated using the training data and a model of the new generation of models. The transformed training data includes, for each observation, a transformed feature set comprising a representation of the feature set in a latent space of the model.

Claims (60)

1 . A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing executable instructions, which when executed by a processing device, cause the processing device to perform operations comprising:

receiving training data regarding a set of observations, each observation including a feature set, a treatment, and an outcome;

training, using the training data, a first generation of machine learning (ML) models to predict an outcome for a feature set of a given observation;

generating a new generation of ML models by:

selecting a subset of ML models from the first generation of ML models based on a fitness criteria of each ML model to generate an intermediate layer for use in predicting a treatment; and

applying an algorithm to the selected subset of ML models to generate the new generation of ML models;

generating, using a ML model of the new generation of ML models, a transformed training data from the training data, the transformed training data comprising, for each observation, a transformed feature set comprising a representation of the feature set in a latent space of the ML model, wherein the transformed feature set causes an accuracy of a causal effect estimation by one or more ML models trained based on the training data to improve by at least reducing a treatment-related bias; and

providing a trained ML model of the new generation of ML models capable of estimating a heterogeneous causal effect for a subject not included in the set of observations based on a representation of the subject in the latent space of the ML model.

2 . The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1 , wherein training the first generation of ML models comprises:

for each ML model of the first generation of ML models, initializing a set of weights for a first transformation of the ML model based on stochastic sampling of one or more distributions of initial weights; and

for each ML model of the first generation of ML models, iteratively updating the set of weights for the first transformation based on the fitness criteria.

3 . The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1 , wherein generating the new generation of ML models comprises:

selecting a fittest-model, based on the fitness criteria, from the first generation of ML models; and

generating the new generation of ML models to include the fittest-model from the first generation of ML models.

4 . The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1 , wherein generating the new generation of ML models comprises:

for each possible pairing of two ML models from the selected subset of ML models, generating a descendent-model based on stochastically generating a set of genetic crossovers between the two ML models of the pair of ML models; and

generating the new generation of ML models to include the descendent-model of each possible pairing of two ML models from the selected subset of ML models.

5 . The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 4 , wherein a pair of two ML models includes a first ML model and a second ML model, and the set of genetic crossovers between the first ML model and the second ML model includes a stochastic shuffling of elements of a first transformation of the first ML model and elements of a first transformation of the second ML model to form a first transformation for a descendent-model of the pair of two ML models that generates the transformed feature set for each observation of the transformed training data.

6 . The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1 , wherein each ML model of the new generation of ML models includes a separate first transformation that generates the transformed feature set for each observation of the transformed training data and a separate second transformation that generates a third feature set for each observation of the transformed training data, and generating the new generation of ML models comprises:

for each ML model of the new generation of ML models, initializing a set of weights for the second transformation of the ML model based on stochastic sampling of one or more distributions of initial weights; and

for each ML model of the new generation of ML models, iteratively updating the set of weights for the second transformation based on decreasing a value of an objective function that indicates an expected value for the third feature set being predictive of a treatment assignment for the observation.

7 . The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 6 , wherein generating the new generation of ML models further comprises:

for each ML model of the new generation of ML models, assigning a fitness metric to the ML model that is based on the fitness criteria, wherein the fitness metric scales with the decreased value of the objective function for the ML model; and

employing the fitness criteria to select a fittest-model of the new generation of ML models, wherein the selected fittest-model has been assigned a largest fitness metric of the new generation of ML models.

8 . The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1 , wherein the operations further comprise:

determining a heterogeneous effect of the treatment based on the transformed training data and a causal ML model.

9 . The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 8 , wherein the causal ML model is a meta-learning model, the heterogeneous effect is a conditional average treatment effect, and the operations further comprise:

employing the transformed training data to train the meta-learning model.

10 . The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1 , wherein the algorithm is a genetic algorithm.

11 . A method comprising:

receiving data regarding a set of observations, the data for each observation including a feature set, a treatment, and an outcome;

determining, using a machine learning (ML) model of a new generation of ML models, a transformed feature set from the feature set for each observation, the new generation of ML models generated by applying an algorithm to a subset of ML models selected from a first generation of ML models based on a fitness criteria of each ML model to generate an intermediate layer for use in predicting a treatment, the transformed feature set comprising, for each observation, a representation of the feature set in a latent space of the ML model;

generating training data comprising, for each observation, the transformed feature set for the observation, the treatment for the observation from the data, and the outcome for the observation from the data; and

training a causal model based on the training data, wherein the causal model is trained to generate a causal effect estimation associated with a subject not included in the set of observations by reducing a treatment-related bias based on the training data and a representation of the subject in a vector space associated with the transformed feature set.

12 . The method of claim 11 , wherein the algorithm is a genetic algorithm and the causal model is implemented by a meta-learner.

13 . The method of claim 11 , wherein training the causal model includes training the causal model to determine a heterogeneous effect of the treatment based on the transformed training data.

14 . The method of claim 11 , wherein each ML model of the new generation of ML models is implemented by a neural network-based architecture and the intermediate layer is an intermediate layer in the neural network-based architecture.

15 . The method of claim 11 , further comprising:

employing other training data to train the first generation of ML models to predict an outcome for a feature set of a given observation.

16 . The method of claim 15 , wherein training the first generation of ML models comprises:

for each ML model of the first generation of ML models, initializing a set of weights for a first transformation of the ML model based on stochastic sampling of one or more distributions of initial weights; and

for each ML model of the first generation of ML models, iteratively updating the set of weights for the first transformation based on the fitness criteria.

17 . The method of claim 15 , wherein generating the new generation of ML models comprises:

selecting a fittest-model, based on the fitness criteria, from the first generation of ML models; and

generating the new generation of ML models to include the fittest-model from the first generation of ML models.

18 . A system comprising:

a memory component; and

a processing device coupled to the memory component, the processing device to perform operations comprising:

receiving training data regarding a set of observations, each observation including a feature set, a treatment, and an outcome;

training, using the training data, a first generation of first machine learning (ML) models to predict an outcome for a feature set of a given observation;

for each first ML model from the first generation of first ML models, training a second ML model to predict a treatment using an intermediate layer of the first ML model as an input layer to the second ML model;

generating a new generation of first ML models by:

selecting a subset of first ML models from the trained first generation of first ML models based on a fitness criteria of each first ML model to generate an intermediate layer for use by a corresponding second ML model in predicting a treatment; and

using an algorithm to generate the new generation of first ML models using the selected subset of first ML models;

generating, using a first ML model of the new generation of ML models, a transformed training data from the training data, the transformed training data comprising, for each observation, a transformed feature set comprising a representation of the feature set in a latent space of the first ML model and the transformed training data is generated based on a neural network layer trained using the algorithm, wherein the algorithm is a genetic algorithm that evolves model parameters over successive generations; and

providing a trained ML model of the new generation of ML models capable of estimating a causal effect for a subject not included in the set of observations based on the representation of the subject in the latent space of the ML model.

19 . The system of claim 18 , wherein generating the new generation of ML models comprises:

for each possible pairing of two ML models from the selected subset of ML models, generating a descendent-model based on stochastically generating a set of genetic crossovers between the two ML models of the pair of ML models; and

generating the new generation of ML models to include the descendent-model of each possible pairing of two ML models from the selected subset of ML models.

20 . The system of claim 19 , wherein a pair of two ML models includes a first ML model and a second ML model, and the set of genetic crossovers between the first ML model and the second ML model includes a stochastic shuffling of elements of a first transformation of the first ML model and elements of a first transformation of the ML second model to form a first transformation for a descendent-model of the pair of two ML models that generates the transformed feature set for each observation of the transformed training data.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded May 19, 2022
From: BURKHART, MICHAEL CRAIG; RUIZ, GABRIEL
To: ADOBE INC.
Reel/Frame 059963/0451 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20230376776A1 · Nov 23, 2023
References Cited (38)
US 10916333B1 · Yeturu · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 12254030B1 · Guggenmos · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 20090281981A1 · Chen · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20210043086A1 · Chen · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210073626A1 · Brahma · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20230267216A1 · Santana De Oliveira · 2023 [cited by examiner]
Kar et al., “Meta-sim: learning to generate synthetic datasets”, ICCV2019, 2019 (Year: 2019). [cited by examiner]
Baluja, et al., “Adversarial transformation networks: learning to generate adversarial examples”, arXiv: 1703.0938yv1 [cs.NE] Mar. 28, 2017 (Year: 2017). [cited by examiner]
Athey, S., et al., “Generalized Random Forests”, The Annals of Statistics, Institute of Mathematical Statistics, vol. 47, No. 2, 1148-1178 (2019). [cited by applicant]
Bengio, Y., et al., “Representation Learning: A Review and New Perspectives”, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 35, Issue 8, pp. 1-31 (2013). [cited by applicant]
Duchi, J., et al., “Adaptive Subgradient Methods for Online Learning and Stochastic Optimization”, Journal of Machine Learning Research, vol. 12, pp. 2121-2159 (Jul. 2011). [cited by applicant]
Fogel, L. J., “Autonomous Automata”, Industrial Research Magazine, vol. 4, Issue 2, pp. 14-19 (1962). [cited by applicant]
Forsyth, R., “Beagle—A Darwinian Approach to Pattern Recognition”, Kybernetes, vol. 10, Issue 3, pp. 159-166 (1981). [cited by applicant]
Glorot, X., and Bengio, Y., “Understanding the difficulty of training deep feedforward neural networks”, Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (AISTATS), Journal of M… [cited by applicant]
Hornik, K., et al., “Multilayer Feedforward Networks are Universal Approximators”, Neural Networks, vol. 2, Issue 5, pp. 359-366 (1989). [cited by applicant]
Johansson, F. D., et al., “Learning Representations for Counterfactual Inference”, Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning, arXiv:1605.03661, vol. 48, pp. 1-11 (Jun. 8, 2016). [cited by applicant]
Ke, G., et al., “LightGBM: A Highly Efficient Gradient Boosting Decision Tree”, 31st Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), pp. 1-9 (2017). [cited by applicant]
Kingma, D. P., and Ba, L. J., “Adam: a Method for Stochastic Optimization”, Proceedings of 3rd International Conference for Learning Representations, arXiv:1412.6980v8, pp. 1-15 (Jul. 23, 2015). [cited by applicant]
Kunzel, S. R., et al., “Metalearners for estimating heterogeneous treatment effects using machine learning”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116, No. 10, pp. 4156-4165 (Mar. 5, 2019). [cited by applicant]
Li, S., and Fu, Y., “Matching on Balanced Nonlinear Representations for Treatment Effects Estimation”, 31st Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), pp. 1-11 (2017). [cited by applicant]
Montana, D. J., and Davis, L., “Training Feedforward Neural Networks Using Genetic Algorithms”, Proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1, pp. 762-767 (1989). [cited by applicant]
Moscato, P., “On Evolution, Search, Optimization, Genetic Algorithms and Martial Arts : Towards Memetic Algorithms”, Caltech Concurrent Computation Program, California Institute of Technology, pp. 1-68 (1989). [cited by applicant]
Neyman, J., “Sur les applications de la theorie des probabilit'es aux experiences agricoles: Essay des principes”, Rocz. Nauk Rol., vol. 10, 1-52 (1923). [cited by applicant]
Nie, X., and Wager, S., “Quasi-oracle estimation of heterogeneous treatment effects”, Biometrika, vol. 108, Issue 2, pp. 299-319 (2021). [cited by applicant]
Robins, J. M., “Optimal Structural Nested Models for Optimal Sequential Decisions”, Proceedings of the Second Seattle Symposium in Biostatistics, Part of the Lecture Notes in Statistics book series (LNS), vol. 179, pp. … [cited by applicant]
Robinson, P. M., “Root-N-Consistent Semiparametric Regression”, Econometrica, Journal of the Econometric Society, vol. 56, No. 4, pp. 931-954 (Jul. 1988). [cited by applicant]
Rosenbaum, P. R., and Rubin, D. B., “The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects”, Biometrika, vol. 70, Issue 1, pp. 41-55 (1983). [cited by applicant]
Rubin, D. B., “Estimating Causal Effects of Treatments in Randomized and Nonrandomized Studies”, Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 66, No. 5, pp. 688-701 (1974). [cited by applicant]
Shalit, U., et al., “Estimating individual treatment effect: generalization bounds and algorithms”, Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, vol. 70, pp. 1-10 (2017). [cited by applicant]
Shanechi, M. M., et al., “Rapid control and feedback rates enhance neuroprosthetic control”, Nature Communications, Article No. 813825, pp. 1-10 (2017). [cited by applicant]
Srivastava, N., “Dropout: A Simple Way to Prevent Neural Networks from Overfitting”, Journal of Machine Learning Research, vol. 15, pp. 1929-1958 (2014). [cited by applicant]
Stanley, K. O., et al., “Designing neural networks through neuroevolution”, Nature Machine Intelligence, vol. 1, pp. 24-35 (Jan. 2019). [cited by applicant]
Tihonov, A. N., “Solution of Incorrectly Formulated Problems and the Regularization Method”, Soviet Mathematics, vol. 4, Issue 4, pp. 1035-1038 (1963). [cited by applicant]
Wager, S., and Athey, S., “Estimation and Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Random Forests”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 113, No. 523, pp. 1-16 (2018). [cited by applicant]
Yao, L., et al., “Representation Learning for Treatment Effect Estimation from Observational Data”, 32nd Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), vol. 31, pp. 1-11 (2018). [cited by applicant]
Zeiler, M. D., “Adadelta: an Adaptive Learning Rate Method”, arXiv:1212.5701v1, pp. 1-6 (Dec. 22, 2012). [cited by applicant]
Zhang, Y., et al., “Learning Overlapping Representations for the Estimation of Individualized Treatment Effects”, Proceedings of the 23rdInternational Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (AISTATS), arXi… [cited by applicant]
Zhao, H., et al., “On Learning Invariant Representations for Domain Adaptation”, Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning, arXiv:1901.09453v2, pp. 1-21 (May 30, 2019). [cited by applicant]