Explicit Reformulations for Robust Optimization Problems with General Uncertainty Sets
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider a rather general class of mathematical programming problems with data uncertainty, where the uncertainty set is represented by a system of convex inequalities. We prove that the robust counterparts of this class of problems can be reformulated equivalently as finite and explicit optimization problems. Moreover, we develop simplified reformulations for problems with uncertainty sets defined by convex homogeneous functions. Our results provide a unified treatment of many situations that have been investigated in the literature and are applicable to a wider range of problems and more complicated uncertainty sets than those considered before. The analysis in this paper makes it possible to use existing continuous optimization algorithms to solve more complicated robust optimization problems. The analysis also shows how the structure of the resulting reformulation of the robust counterpart depends both on the structure of the original nominal optimization problem and on the structure of the uncertainty set.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it