2505.04815
Causal Discovery in Symmetric Dynamic Systems with Convergent Cross Mapping
Yiting Duan, Yi Guo, Jack Yang, Ming Yin
correctmedium confidence
- Category
- Not specified
- Journal tier
- Strong Field
- Processed
- Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM
- arXiv Links
- Abstract ↗PDF ↗
Audit review
The paper proves that for C2 symmetry Rxn(π):(x1,…,xn)→(−x1,…,−x_{n−1},xn), the nth-coordinate observation h(x)=xn is even, so all time-derivatives retain even parity, giving F_{xn,n}(R·x)=F_{xn,n}(x) and thus a generically two-to-one, noninjective reconstruction; in contrast, xi (i<n) is odd, giving inversion symmetry in its reconstruction. This produces a noninjective cross-map Π_{xixn}=F_{xn,n}∘f′∘(F_{xi,n})^{-1}, so CCM falsely indicates unidirectional causality even when coupling is bidirectional. These steps are stated and sketched in Proposition 1 with equations (4.6)–(4.10) and (4.11) in the paper, and the general limit of single-observable differential reconstructions to at most Z2 symmetry is stated as Theorem 3 (Cross). The candidate solution reproduces the same parity argument, the two-to-one/noninjectivity conclusion, and the Π construction, matching the paper’s logic and conclusions.
Referee report (LaTeX)
\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions \textbf{Journal Tier:} strong field \textbf{Justification:} The manuscript gives a coherent theoretical account of why CCM can misidentify causality in the presence of two-fold rotational symmetry and complements this with a practical segmentation remedy. The core arguments—parity propagation through derivatives, noninjectivity of the differential reconstruction from an invariant coordinate, and the induced noninjective cross-map—are correct and clearly linked to CCM’s projection/homeomorphism framework. Minor revisions are warranted to explicitly state embedding assumptions, clarify the scope of two-to-one mapping (excluding fixed sets), and provide a precise source or proof sketch for the Z2 symmetry bound.