NeurIPS 2020

Deep Structural Causal Models for Tractable Counterfactual Inference

Meta Review

The reviewers agree on the whole that this work addresses an important problem and that the paper makes sound, well-supported claims. The rebuttal did a good job at clarifying the scope of their work, largely improving the scores of the reviewers. I urge the authors to carefully update the paper to address the reviewers concerns in the final version. Examples of what to improve include: - Description of the "intervention vs counterfactual" distinction. One reviewer recommends: “since it is key for the paper's novelty claim I think this distinction needs a little more explanation, perhaps through a simple example” - Engage with the existing literature on causal inference. - State clearly the assumptions and limitations of the work. I vote to accept.