Causal reasoning (CR) is a crucial aspect of intelligence, essential for problem-solving, decision-making, and understanding the world. While language models (LMs) can generate rationales for their outputs, their ability to reliably perform causal reasoning remains uncertain, often falling short in tasks requiring a deep understanding of causality. In this paper, we introduce CausalEval, a comprehensive review of research aimed at enhancing LMs for causal reasoning, coupled with an empirical evaluation of current models and methods. We categorize existing methods based on the role of LMs: either as reasoning engines or as helpers providing knowledge or data to traditional CR methods, followed by a detailed discussion of methodologies in each category. We then assess the performance of current LMs and various enhancement methods on a range of causal reasoning tasks, providing key findings and in-depth analysis. Finally, we present insights from current studies and highlight promising directions for future research. We aim for this work to serve as a comprehensive resource, fostering further advancements in causal reasoning with LMs.

Enhancing the reasoning capabilities of language models (LMs) remains a key challenge, especially for tasks that require complex, multi-step decision-making where existing Chain-of-Thought (CoT) approaches struggle with consistency and verification. In this paper, we propose a novel reasoning framework, referred to as Structure-aware Planning with an Accurate World Model (SWAP), that integrates structured knowledge representation with learned planning. Unlike prior methods that rely purely on natural language reasoning, SWAP leverages entailment graphs to encode structured dependencies and enable symbolic verification of intermediate steps. To systematically construct and update the graph, SWAP employs a policy model to propose candidate expansions and a world model to predict structural updates. To improve accuracy, the world model generates multiple alternative updates, and a discriminator re-ranks them based on plausibility. To encourage diverse exploration, we introduce Diversity-based Modelling (DM), which samples candidates from the remaining probability mass after removing previously sampled candidates from the original policy distribution. Additionally, SWAP improves the discrimination accuracy through Contrastive Ranking (CR), which directly compares candidates within prompts and incorporates meta-knowledge to improve ranking quality. We evaluate SWAP across diverse reasoning-intensive benchmarks including math reasoning, logical reasoning, and coding tasks. Extensive experiments demonstrate that SWAP significantly improves upon the base models and consistently outperforms existing reasoning methods.