A survey of contextual optimization methods for decision-making under uncertainty
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
Recently there has been a surge of interest in operations research (OR) and the machine learning (ML) community in combining prediction algorithms and optimization techniques to solve decision-making problems in the face of uncertainty. This gave rise to the field of contextual optimization, under which data-driven procedures are developed to prescribe actions to the decision-maker that make the best use of the most recently updated information. A large variety of models and methods have been presented in both OR and ML literature under a variety of names, including data-driven optimization, prescriptive optimization, predictive stochastic programming, policy optimization, (smart) predict/estimate-then-optimize, decision-focused learning, (task-based) end-to-end learning/forecasting/optimization, etc. This survey article unifies these models under the lens of contextual stochastic optimization, thus providing a general presentation of a large variety of problems. We identify three main frameworks for learning policies from data and present the existing models and methods under a uniform notation and terminology. Our objective with this survey is to both strengthen the general understanding of this active field of research and stimulate further theoretical and algorithmic advancements in integrating ML and stochastic programming.
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 | 0.081 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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