Causality, Explanations, Machine Learning, and Engineering

Abstract Causality and explanation are fundamental, yet often underacknowledged, in engineering. While engineering education emphasizes design principles, codes of practice, and technical considerations, the explicit notion of causality is typically buried under layers of empirical formulas, rule-based guidelines, and prescriptive procedures. This paper examines how causality remains elemental in engineering practices and why codal provisions and curricula often treat it only implicitly. This paper also explores the interplay between causality and machine learning (ML), which excels at detecting associations, but questions still arise regarding its ability to explain and capture causal relations. In a series of case studies, we argue that building codes conventionally distill collective engineering wisdom and embed causal reasoning in simplified yet codified rules. However, this embedding is seldom articulated as “causality,” which leads to potential gaps in how engineers explain their decisions. Thus, this paper advocates for a renewed focus on causality in engineering by bridging philosophical inquiry, engineering methodology, and ML.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Foundations of Science
Published
2025-10-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-025-10006-3
Primary Topic
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Causality, Explanations, Machine Learning, and Engineering

Mohannad Zeyad Naser
Foundations of Science
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
article

Causality, Explanations, Machine Learning, and Engineering

Mohannad Zeyad Naser
article en

Abstract

Abstract Causality and explanation are fundamental, yet often underacknowledged, in engineering. While engineering education emphasizes design principles, codes of practice, and technical considerations, the explicit notion of causality is typically buried under layers of empirical formulas, rule-based guidelines, and prescriptive procedures. This paper examines how causality remains elemental in engineering practices and why codal provisions and curricula often treat it only implicitly. This paper also explores the interplay between causality and machine learning (ML), which excels at detecting associations, but questions still arise regarding its ability to explain and capture causal relations. In a series of case studies, we argue that building codes conventionally distill collective engineering wisdom and embed causal reasoning in simplified yet codified rules. However, this embedding is seldom articulated as “causality,” which leads to potential gaps in how engineers explain their decisions. Thus, this paper advocates for a renewed focus on causality in engineering by bridging philosophical inquiry, engineering methodology, and ML.

Foundations of ScienceVol. 30(4)
Clemson University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 86%
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Causality, Explanations, Machine Learning, and Engineering — Mohannad Zeyad Naser · Foundations of Science (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS