Surreal illustration of a complex AI network with nodes of varying brightness.

Decoding AI: Can We Truly Understand How Machines Learn?

Jordan Keane in Tech & Innovation December 2025 • 4 min read.

"New research explores the limits of learning causal relationships from data, revealing the intrinsic ambiguities that challenge AI's ability to grasp the world like humans do."

Artificial intelligence is rapidly transforming our world, achieving remarkable feats in diverse fields. From powering personalized recommendations to driving autonomous vehicles, AI's capabilities seem boundless. Yet, beneath the surface of these successes lies a critical question: how well do these systems truly understand the world around them?

Current AI approaches primarily focus on identifying statistical patterns in data. While effective for many tasks, this method often leads to superficial associations and brittle performance. These systems struggle when faced with new situations or unexpected changes in the data, highlighting a significant gap in their ability to generalize and adapt.

A promising avenue for addressing this challenge is causal representation learning. This approach aims to equip AI with the ability to understand cause-and-effect relationships, mirroring how humans make decisions and reason about the world. By learning the underlying causal structure of data, AI systems can potentially overcome the limitations of purely statistical approaches and achieve more robust and reliable performance.

Why is Causal Understanding So Difficult for AI?

Surreal illustration of a complex AI network with nodes of varying brightness.

Imagine trying to understand a complex system without knowing which parts influence others. That's the challenge AI faces when learning from observational data. Traditional methods struggle to distinguish between genuine causal connections and mere correlations. For instance, a rise in ice cream sales might correlate with an increase in crime rates, but ice cream isn't causing crime. Both might be influenced by a third factor, like warmer weather.

One of the key challenges in causal representation learning is identifiability: can we uniquely determine the true causal model from the data we observe? Research has shown that with observational data alone, many different causal structures can appear equally plausible, leading to ambiguity. This problem becomes even more complex when dealing with high-level, latent variables that are not directly observable.

Limited Interventions: Prior studies often rely on the assumption of single-node interventions, which means directly manipulating individual variables to observe their effects. However, this is often unrealistic in real-world scenarios, where intervening on a single factor in isolation is difficult or impossible.
Intrinsic Ambiguity: New research highlights an inherent limitation called "surrounded-node ambiguity" (SNA). This concept suggests that in certain causal structures, the effect of one variable can be indistinguishable from the effect of its neighbors, making it difficult to isolate the true causal relationships.
General Environments: Instead of relying on limited interventions, new studies explore learning from diverse and general environments, where multiple factors change simultaneously. While this approach is more realistic, it also presents significant challenges for identifiability.

Recent work has made strides in understanding how to learn causal representations from data collected across multiple environments. These studies show that even with access to diverse data, accurately identifying causal relationships remains a formidable task. The inherent ambiguities in causal structures, as highlighted by the SNA concept, pose fundamental limits on what AI can learn from even the richest datasets.

The Future of AI: Embracing Ambiguity and Seeking Deeper Understanding

While the challenges of causal representation learning are significant, they also point towards exciting new directions for AI research. By acknowledging and addressing the inherent ambiguities in learning causal relationships, we can develop more robust, reliable, and human-like AI systems. Future work should focus on developing new algorithms that can handle ambiguity, explore alternative types of interventions, and integrate common-sense knowledge to guide causal inference. Embracing these challenges will pave the way for AI that truly understands the world around it, leading to breakthroughs in diverse fields.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.12267,

Title: Learning Causal Representations From General Environments: Identifiability And Intrinsic Ambiguity

Subject: cs.lg cs.ai econ.em stat.ap stat.ml

Authors: Jikai Jin, Vasilis Syrgkanis

Published: 20-11-2023

Everything You Need To Know

What is 'causal representation learning' and why is it important for the future of AI?

'Causal representation learning' is an approach that aims to equip AI with the ability to understand cause-and-effect relationships. It's crucial because current AI often relies on identifying statistical patterns, which can lead to superficial associations and poor performance in new situations. By learning the underlying 'causal structure' of data, AI systems can overcome these limitations, becoming more robust and reliable, and mirroring how humans reason and make decisions. Without it, AI remains limited in its ability to generalize and adapt to novel situations.

What makes it so difficult for AI to achieve 'causal understanding'?

One major hurdle is distinguishing genuine causal connections from mere correlations. AI struggles to discern whether a variable truly influences another or if they're both affected by a third, unobserved factor. The problem of 'identifiability' arises because observational data alone can support multiple plausible causal structures, leading to ambiguity. This is made worse by the existence of 'latent variables' that we can't directly observe, adding complexity to figuring out cause and effect.

What is 'surrounded-node ambiguity' (SNA), and how does it limit AI's ability to learn causal relationships?

'Surrounded-node ambiguity' (SNA) is an inherent limitation where the effect of one variable in a causal structure is indistinguishable from the effects of its neighboring variables. This makes it difficult to isolate the true causal relationships, even with rich datasets. Essentially, SNA creates a fundamental limit on what AI can learn from data because the system cannot determine which node is responsible for the observed effect.

How have traditional approaches to 'causal representation learning' been limited, and what new approaches are being explored?

Prior studies often assumed 'single-node interventions,' directly manipulating individual variables to see the effects. This is unrealistic, as isolating single factors is often impossible in real-world scenarios. Newer studies explore learning from 'general environments,' where multiple factors change simultaneously. While more realistic, this presents significant challenges for identifiability. The shift acknowledges that real-world data often comes from complex, uncontrolled settings, requiring new methods that can handle ambiguity and intertwined variables.

Given the challenges of 'causal representation learning', what should future AI research focus on to achieve more human-like understanding?

Future AI research should focus on developing algorithms that can handle ambiguity, explore alternative types of interventions beyond 'single-node interventions', and integrate common-sense knowledge to guide causal inference. By embracing these challenges and acknowledging the inherent ambiguities in causal relationships, we can develop more robust, reliable, and human-like AI systems. This also means moving beyond purely statistical methods and incorporating more knowledge-driven approaches.