Learning to Optimize Contextually Constrained Problems for Real-Time Decision Generation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".