You don't need a comma at every occurrence of "because". There may be other scenarios, but generally you almost always need a comma when trying to establish a cause-effect relationship using 'because' and you start the sentence with negation.
Also, there are some instances where you don't want a comma before 'because' so don't blindly follow that rule either!
To answer your question, let's consider this example,
I wouldn't go to London because of the weather.
Sounds obvious right? Yes, in vernacular it sounds like the speaker wants you to avoid London because of its weather, but wait! By not putting the comma, you're leaving the statement ambiguous.
As someone who loves London, I can misconstrue the sentence to mean that you would go to London, but weather is not a reason why. In other words, I could suppose what you really meant was:
I wouldn't go to London because of the weather(, instead I would go to London for other reasons)
I wouldn't go to London, because of the weather.
The use of 'because' in the first sentence above excludes the succeeding clause (the weather) as a reason for why the initial clause is true (going to London).
If you're trying to establish cause and effect between the clause preceding "because", and the clause succeeding "because", it's good practice to use a comma.
So, to answer your question, yes the correct form for what you're trying to write is:
This might be, because another algorithm was chosen.
For further reference, you can consult this excellent article I found in a peripheral search of Google that provides an excellent summary of when to, and when not to use a comma preceding 'because'.