An approximation scheme for stochastic linear programming and its application to stochastic integer programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stochastic optimization problems attempt to model uncertainty in the data by assuming that the input is specified by a probability distribution. We consider the well-studied paradigm of 2-stage models with recourse: first, given only distributional information about (some of) the data one commits on initial actions, and then once the actual data is realized (according to the distribution), further (recourse) actions can be taken. We show that for a broad class of 2-stage linear models with recourse, one can, for any ϵ > 0, in time polynomial in 1/ϵ and the size of the input, compute a solution of value within a factor (1+ϵ) of the optimum, in spite of the fact that exponentially many second-stage scenarios may occur. In conjunction with a suitable rounding scheme, this yields the first approximation algorithms for 2-stage stochastic integer optimization problems where the underlying random data is given by a “black box” and no restrictions are placed on the costs in the two stages. Our rounding approach for stochastic integer programs shows that an approximation algorithm for a deterministic analogue yields, with a small constant-factor loss, provably near-optimal solutions for the stochastic generalization. Among the range of applications, we consider are stochastic versions of the multicommodity flow, set cover, vertex cover, and facility location problems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".