The value of randomized strategies in distributionally robust risk averse network interdiction games
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conditional Value at Risk (CVaR) is widely used to account for the preferences of a risk-averse agent in the extreme loss scenarios. To study the effectiveness of randomization in interdiction games with an interdictor that is both risk and ambiguity averse, we introduce a distributionally robust network interdiction game where the interdictor randomizes over the feasible interdiction plans in order to minimize the worst-case CVaR of the flow with respect to both the unknown distribution of the capacity of the arcs and his mixed strategy over interdicted arcs. The flow player, on the contrary, maximizes the total flow in the network. By using the budgeted uncertainty set, we control the degree of conservatism in the model and reformulate the interdictor's non-linear problem as a bi-convex optimization problem. For solving this problem to any given optimality level, we devise a spatial branch and bound algorithm that uses the McCormick inequalities and reduced reformulation linearization technique (RRLT) to obtain convex relaxation of the problem. We also develop a column generation algorithm to identify the optimal support of the convex relaxation which is then used in the coordinate descent algorithm to determine the upper bounds. The efficiency and convergence of the spatial branch and bound algorithm is established in the numerical experiments. Further, our numerical experiments show that randomized strategies can have significantly better in-sample and out-of-sample performance than optimal deterministic ones.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".