MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142975476 · doi:10.1287/ijoc.2013.0553

Online Sequential Optimization with Biased Gradients: Theory and Applications to Censored Demand

2013· article· en· W2142975476 on OpenAlexaff
Woonghee Tim Huh, Paat Rusmevichientong

Bibliographic record

VenueINFORMS journal on computing · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvexityMathematical optimizationConvex optimizationGeneralizationConvex functionComputer scienceRegular polygonGradient descentMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study a class of stochastic optimization problems, where although the objective functions may not be convex, they satisfy a generalization of convexity called the sequentially convex property. We focus on a setting where the distribution of the underlying uncertainty is unknown and the manager must make a decision in real time based on historical data. Because sequentially convex functions are not necessarily convex, they pose difficulties in applying standard adaptive methods for convex optimization. We propose a nonparametric algorithm based on a gradient descent method and show that the T-season average expected cost differs from the minimum cost by at most [Formula: see text]. Our analysis is based on a careful quantification of the bias that is inherent in gradient estimation because of the adaptive nature of the problem. We demonstrate the usefulness of the concept of sequential convexity by applying it to three canonical problems in inventory control, capacity allocation, and the lifetime buy decision, under the assumption that the manager does not know the demand distributions and has access only to historical sales (censored demand) data.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.334 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINFORMS journal on computingSame topicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207