CausalGame: Benchmarking Causal Thinking of LLM Agents in Games
Zhenhao Chen, Yongqiang Chen, Chenxi Liu, Junchi Yu, Xiangchen Song, Zijian Li, Jialin Li, Phil Torr, Bo Han, Kun Zhang
Abstract
Building AI Scientist agents with Large Language Models (LLMs) has recently attracted growing attention. Since scientific discovery fundamentally relies on uncovering causal relationships from observations, the capability of causal thinking, i.e., distinguishing causation from correlation and recognizing hidden biases, is essential to LLM agents. Although a number of benchmarks exist for AI Scientists, none explicitly incorporates challenges from selection bias, measurement error, and hidden confounders that widely exist in real-world scientific discovery. To this end, we present CausalGame, a benchmark that evaluates the causal thinking capabilities of LLM agents through interactive games. CausalGame asks LLM agents to actively design experimental protocols, collect observation data, and derive a final solution with an explanation report. To emulate realistic scientific discovery challenges, we design 14 scenarios that incorporate selection bias, measurement error, and hidden confounders. Across 30 LLM agents, none demonstrates reliable causal thinking: the best model reaches only 68.0% survival against analytical optima of 78-85%, and merely 5-7% of sessions receive credits on the causal-reasoning rubrics. CausalGame provides a scalable and controlled testbed for evaluating the causal thinking of AI Scientist agents.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext ebaade1f-3a3c-4ea9-8d93-d4135961dba8Builds on34
- Learn to Explain: Multimodal Reasoning via Thought Chains for Science Question AnsweringPan Lu, Swaroop Mishra, Tanglin Xia, Liang Qiu et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 2,727 citations
- Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human PreferenceWei-Lin Chiang, Lianmin Zheng, Ying Sheng, Anastasios Nikolas Angelopoulos et al.ICML 2024 · 1,212 citations
- MMMU-Pro: A More Robust Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding BenchmarkXiang Yue, Tianyu Zheng, Yuansheng Ni, Yubo Wang et al.ACL 2025 · 377 citations
- MMMU: A Massive Multi-Discipline Multimodal Understanding and Reasoning Benchmark for Expert AGIXiang Yue, Yuansheng Ni, Tianyu Zheng, Kai Zhang et al.CVPR 2024 · 213 citations
- ShinkaEvolve: Towards Open-Ended and Sample-Efficient Program EvolutionRobert T. Lange, Yuki Imajuku, Edoardo CetinICLR 2026 · 162 citations
Related papers
- CauSciBench: Can LLMs Automate Causal Inference in Real-World Scientific Research?Sawal Acharya, Terry J Zhang, Andrew Kim, Rahul B Shrestha et al.ICML 2026
- CausalStep: A Benchmark for Explicit Stepwise Causal Reasoning in VideosXuchen Li, Xuzhao Li, Shiyu Hu, Kaiqi Huang et al.AAAI 2026 · 7 citations
- LLM-SRBench: A New Benchmark for Scientific Equation Discovery with Large Language ModelsParshin Shojaee, Ngoc-Hieu Nguyen, Kazem Meidani, Amir Barati Farimani et al.ICML 2025
- Ice Cream Doesn't Cause Drowning: Benchmarking LLMs Against Statistical Pitfalls in Causal InferenceJin Du, Li Chen, Xun Xian, An Luo et al.ICLR 2026 · 4 citations
- FIRE-Bench: Evaluating AI Agents on the Rediscovery of Scientific InsightsZhen Wang, Fan Bai, Zhongyan Luo, Jinyan Su et al.ICML 2026 · 2 citations
