MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417297121 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.10906

Distributionally Robust Regret Optimal Control Under Moment-Based Ambiguity Sets

2025· preprint· W4417297121 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCornell Atkinson Center for Sustainability, Cornell UniversityDavid R. Atkinson Center for a Sustainable Future , Cornell University
KeywordsSubgradient methodSemidefinite programmingConvex optimizationOptimal controlRegretMinimaxConvexityProbability distributionAmbiguityStochastic control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a class of finite-horizon, linear-quadratic stochastic control problems, where the probability distribution governing the noise process is unknown but assumed to belong to an ambiguity set consisting of all distributions whose mean and covariance lie within norm balls centered at given nominal values. To cope with this ambiguity, we design causal affine control policies to minimize the worst-case expected regret over all distributions in the ambiguity set. The resulting minimax optimal control problem is shown to admit an equivalent reformulation as a tractable convex program, which can be interpreted as a regularized version of the nominal linear-quadratic stochastic control problem. Based on the dual of this convex reformulation, we develop a scalable projected subgradient method for computing optimal controllers to arbitrary accuracy. Numerical experiments are provided to compare the proposed method with state-of-the-art data-driven control design methods.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.103 · 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