MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Inner Approximations of Stochastic Programs for Data-Driven Stochastic Barrier Function Design

2023· article· en· W4391020856 on OpenAlexaff
Frederik Baymler Mathiesen, Licio Romao, Simeon C. Calvert, Alessandro Abate, Luca Laurenti

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Portfolio Optimization
Canadian institutionsTransport Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLogarithmLinear programmingAffine transformationMathematical optimizationStochastic programmingReduction (mathematics)Noise (video)Function (biology)Stochastic optimizationAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a new framework to compute finite-horizon safety guarantees for discrete-time piece-wise affine systems with stochastic noise of unknown distributions. The approach is based on a novel approach to synthesise a stochastic barrier function (SBF) from noisy data and rely on the scenario optimization theory. In particular, we show that the stochastic program to synthesize a SBF can be relaxed into a chance-constrained optimisation problem on which scenario approach theory applies. We further show that the resulting program can be reduced to a linear programming problem, thus guaranteeing efficiency. In contrast to existing approaches, this method is data efficient as it only requires the number of data to be proportional to the logarithm in the negative inverse of the confidence level and is computationally efficient due to its reduction to linear programming. The efficacy of the method is empirically evaluated on various verification benchmarks. Experiments show a significant improvement with respect to state-of-the-art, obtaining tighter certificates with a confidence that is several orders of magnitude higher.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.251
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.141 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRisk and Portfolio OptimizationFrench-language works237,207