MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396608908 · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2020.03565

Learning to Optimize Contextually Constrained Problems for Real-Time Decision Generation

2024· article· en· W4396608908 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Artificial intelligenceCognitive psychologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The topic of learning to solve optimization problems has received interest from both the operations research and machine learning communities. In this paper, we combine ideas from both fields to address the problem of learning to generate decisions to instances of optimization problems with potentially nonlinear or nonconvex constraints where the feasible set varies with contextual features. We propose a novel framework for training a generative model to produce provably optimal decisions by combining interior point methods and adversarial learning, which we further embed within an iterative data generation algorithm. To this end, we first train a classifier to learn feasibility and then train the generative model to produce optimal decisions to an optimization problem using the classifier as a regularizer. We prove that decisions generated by our model satisfy in-sample and out-of-sample optimality guarantees. Furthermore, the learning models are embedded in an active learning loop in which synthetic instances are iteratively added to the training data; this allows us to progressively generate provably tighter optimal decisions. We investigate case studies in portfolio optimization and personalized treatment design, demonstrating that our approach yields advantages over predict-then-optimize and supervised deep learning techniques, respectively. In particular, our framework is more robust to parameter estimation error compared with the predict-then-optimize paradigm and can better adapt to domain shift as compared with supervised learning models. This paper was accepted by Chung Piaw Teo, optimization. Funding: This work was supported in part by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2020.03565 .

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.250 · 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