Lagrangian Duality for Robust Problems with Decomposable Functions: The Case of a Robust Inventory Problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider a class of min-max robust problems in which the functions that need to be “robustified” can be decomposed as the sum of arbitrary functions. This class of problems includes many practical problems, such as the lot-sizing problem under demand uncertainty. By considering a Lagrangian relaxation of the uncertainty set, we derive a tractable approximation, called the dual Lagrangian approach, that we relate with both the classical dualization approximation approach and an exact approach. Moreover, we show that the dual Lagrangian approach coincides with the affine decision rule approximation approach. The dual Lagrangian approach is applied to a lot-sizing problem, in which demands are assumed to be uncertain and to belong to the uncertainty set with a budget constraint for each time period. Using the insights provided by the interpretation of the Lagrangian multipliers as penalties in the proposed approach, two heuristic strategies, a new guided iterated local search heuristic, and a subgradient optimization method are designed to solve more complex lot-sizing problems in which additional practical aspects, such as setup costs, are considered. Computational results show the efficiency of the proposed heuristics that provide a good compromise between the quality of the robust solutions and the running time required in their computation. Summary of Contribution: The paper includes both theoretical and algorithmic contributions for a class of min-max robust optimization problems where the objective function includes the maximum of a sum of affine functions. From the theoretical point of view, a tractable Lagrangian dual model resulting from a relaxation of the well-known adversarial problem is proposed, providing a new perspective of well-known models, such as the affinely adjustable robust counterpart (AARC) and the dualization technique introduced by Bertsimas and Sim. These results are particularized to lot-sizing problems. From the algorithm point of view, efficient heuristic schemes—which exploit the information based on the interpretation of the Lagrangian multipliers to solve large size robust problems—are proposed, and their performance is evaluated through extensive computational results based on the lot-sizing problem. In particular, a guided iterated local search and a subgradient optimization method are proposed and compared against the dualization approach proposed by Bertsimas and Sim and with several heuristics based on the AARC approach, which include an iterated local search heuristic and a Benders decomposition approach. Computational results show the efficiency of the proposed heuristics, which provide a good compromise between the quality of the robust solutions and the running time.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".