An Ensemble Learning Framework for Model Fitting and Evaluation in Inverse Linear Optimization
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 develop a generalized inverse optimization framework for fitting the cost vector of a single linear optimization problem given multiple observed decisions. This setting is motivated by ensemble learning, where building consensus from base learners can yield better predictions. We unify several models in the inverse optimization literature under a single framework and derive assumption-free and exact solution methods for each one. We extend a goodness-of-fit metric previously introduced for the problem with a single observed decision to this new setting and demonstrate several important properties. Finally, we demonstrate our framework in a novel inverse optimization-driven procedure for automated radiation therapy treatment planning. Here, the inverse optimization model leverages an ensemble of dose predictions from different machine learning models to construct a consensus treatment plan that outperforms baseline methods. The consensus plan yields better trade-offs between the competing clinical criteria used for plan evaluation.
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 | 0.009 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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