MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385774847 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2308.05414

Unifying Distributionally Robust Optimization via Optimal Transport Theory

2023· preprint· en· W4385774847 on OpenAlexfundno aff
José Blanchet, Daniel Kühn, Jiajin Li, Bahar Taşkesen

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMathematical optimizationComputer scienceDivergence (linguistics)Duality (order theory)Measure (data warehouse)Robust optimizationMoment (physics)Baseline (sea)Adversarial systemMathematicsArtificial intelligenceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, two prominent paradigms have shaped distributionally robust optimization (DRO), modeling distributional ambiguity through $ϕ$-divergences and Wasserstein distances, respectively. While the former focuses on ambiguity in likelihood ratios, the latter emphasizes ambiguity in outcomes and uses a transportation cost function to capture geometric structure in the outcome space. This paper proposes a unified framework that bridges these approaches by leveraging optimal transport (OT) with conditional moment constraints. Our formulation enables adversarial distributions to jointly perturb likelihood ratios and outcomes, yielding a generalized OT coupling between the nominal and perturbed distributions. We further establish key duality results and develop tractable reformulations that highlight the practical power of our unified approach.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.211
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.025 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207