DriftGuard-AEDL: Concept-Drift-Aware Continual Neuro-Symbolic Causal Inference for Evolving Time Series
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/r8xt9f35Keywords:
Concept drift, Continual learning, Neuro-symbolic AI, Causal inference, Structural vector autoregression, Time-series analysis, Drift detectionAbstract
Structural causal models estimated on non-stationary time series are threatened by concept drift: the data-generating structure itself changes over time, silently invalidating a once-correct model. Recent neuro-symbolic pipelines such as Adaptive Event-Driven Labeling (AEDL) combine language-model reasoning with econometric identification, but they are trained one-shot and assume a fixed causal graph and a static anchor set. We propose DriftGuard-AEDL, a concept-drift-aware, continual extension that (i) estimates a contemporaneous causal graph online under a symbolic prior that encodes a known causal ordering and sign constraints; (ii) detects drift with a two-signal detector that couples a residual Page-Hinkley test with a lagged-reference test on the reduced-form coefficient stream; (iii) uses a symbolic verifier as an acceptance gate that admits an adaptation only when the re-estimated structure is economically coherent and materially changed; and (iv) adapts continually with anchor re-calibration and replay. On a controlled regime-switching structural VAR with known ground truth, DriftGuard-AEDL recovers the causal structure far better than drift-agnostic baselines (structural Hamming distance 1.9 vs. 7.3–8.2 and edge-F1 0.75 vs. ≤0.15) and matches a continuously retrained sliding-window model in predictive error while using 6 updates instead of 114; the symbolic gate cuts the false-alarm rate from 0.71 to 0.50 and the update count from 9.4 to 6.0. On the real Elec2 electricity-market benchmark (45,312 records), it recovers most of the adaptation gain of blind retraining at roughly one-fifth of the update cost and four times the speed. The results show that pairing lightweight symbolic constraints with drift-triggered continual learning yields causal inference that stays valid as the world changes.
Downloads
References
[1] Bertsche, D., & Braun, R. (2022). Identification of structural vector autoregressions by stochastic volatility. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 40(1), 328-341. https://doi.org/10.1080/07350015.2020.1863813 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07350015.2020.1813588
[2] Baumeister, C., & Hamilton, J. D. (2015). Sign restrictions, structural vector autoregressions, and useful prior information. Econometrica, 83(5), 1963-1999. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA12356 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA12356
[3] Liang, Y., Jiao, Y., Ping, W., Fan, H., & Han, X. (2026). Adaptive event-driven labeling: A neuro-symbolic multiagent framework for causal inference in non-stationary time series. IEEE Access, 14, 1-18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2026.3709267
[4] Gama, J., Žliobaitė, I., Bifet, A., Pechenizkiy, M., & Bouchachia, A. (2014). A survey on concept drift adaptation. ACM Computing Surveys, 46(4), Article 44, 1-37. https://doi.org/10.1145/2523813 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2523813
[5] Lu, J., Liu, A., Dong, F., Gu, F., Gama, J., & Zhang, G. (2019). Learning under concept drift: A review. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 31(12), 2346-2363. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2018.2876857 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2018.2876857
[6] Page, E. S. (1954). Continuous inspection schemes. Biometrika, 41(1/2), 100-115. https://doi.org/10.2307/2333009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/41.1-2.100
[7] Harries, M. (1999). Splice-2 comparative evaluation: Electricity pricing (Technical Report). University of New South Wales.
[8] Bifet, A., & Gavaldà, R. (2007). Learning from time-changing data with adaptive windowing. In Proceedings of the SIAM International Conference on Data Mining (SDM) (pp. 443-448). SIAM. https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611972771.42 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611972771.42
[9] Widmer, G., & Kubat, M. (1996). Learning in the presence of concept drift and hidden contexts. Machine Learning, 23(1), 69-101. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00116900 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018046501280
[10] Kirkpatrick, J., Pascanu, R., Rabinowitz, N., Veness, J., Desjardins, G., Rusu, A. A., Milan, K., Quan, J., Ramalho, T., Grabska-Barwinska, A., Hassabis, D., Clopath, C., Kumaran, D., & Hadsell, R. (2017). Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(13), 3521-3526. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1611835114 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1611835114
[11] Chickering, D. M. (2002). Optimal structure identification with greedy search. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 507-554.
[12] Spirtes, P., Glymour, C., & Scheines, R. (2000). Causation, prediction, and search (2nd ed.). MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1754.001.0001
[13] Runge, J., Nowack, P., Kretschmer, M., Flaxman, S., & Sejdinovic, D. (2019). Detecting and quantifying causal associations in large nonlinear time series datasets. Science Advances, 5(11), Article eaau4996. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau4996 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau4996
[14] Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6(2), 461-464. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344136 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344136
[15] Kilian, L. (2009). Not all oil price shocks are alike: Disentangling demand and supply shocks in the crude oil market. American Economic Review, 99(3), 1053-1069. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.99.3.1053 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.99.3.1053
[16] Montiel Olea, J. L., Stock, J. H., & Watson, M. W. (2021). Inference in structural vector autoregressions identified with an external instrument. Journal of Econometrics, 225(1), 74-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2021.01.012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2020.05.014
[17] Stock, J. H., & Watson, M. W. (2018). Identification and estimation of dynamic causal effects in macroeconomics using external instruments. The Economic Journal, 128(610), 917-948. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12593 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12593
[18] Caldara, D., & Iacoviello, M. (2022). Measuring geopolitical risk. American Economic Review, 112(4), 1194-1225. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20191823 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20191823
[19] Zi, B. (2024). Cloud-native distributed systems for real-time payment intelligence. AI and Data Science Journal, 1(1), 51-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61784/adsj3035
[20] Du, Y., Li, S., Torralba, A., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Mordatch, I. (2024). Improving factuality and reasoning in language models through multiagent debate. In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML). PMLR.
[21] Colelough, B. C., & Regli, W. (2025). Neuro-symbolic AI in 2024: A systematic review. arXiv, arXiv:2501.05435. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2501.05435
[22] Kadavath, S., Conerly, T., Askell, A., Henighan, T., Drain, D., Perez, E., Schiefer, N., Hatfield-Dodds, Z., DasSarma, N., Tran-Johnson, E., Johnston, S., El-Showk, S., Jones, A., Elhage, N., Hume, T., Chen, A., Bai, Y., Bowman, S., Fort, S., ... & Kaplan, J. (2022). Language models (mostly) know what they know. arXiv, arXiv:2207.05221. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2207.05221
[23] Primiceri, G. E. (2005). Time varying structural vector autoregressions and monetary policy. Review of Economic Studies, 72(3), 821-852. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-937X.2005.00353.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-937X.2005.00353.x
[24] Jordà, Ò. (2005). Estimation and inference of impulse responses by local projections. American Economic Review, 95(1), 161-182. https://doi.org/10.1257/0002828053828518 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/0002828053828518
[25] Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 993-1022.
[26] Teng, D. (2025). TEAS: Token- and energy-aware autoscaling for cost-efficient LLM serving. AI and Data Science Journal, 6(3), 1-10.
[27] Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M., & Duchesnay, É. (2011). Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825-2830.
[28] Leetaru, K., & Schrodt, P. A. (2013). GDELT: Global data on events, location, and tone, 1979-2012. In Proceedings of the ISA Annual Convention.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Computing and Electronic Information Management

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.








