Sample Average Approximation for Conditional Stochastic Optimization with Dependent Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conditional Stochastic Optimization (CSO) is a powerful modelling paradigm for optimization under uncertainty. The existing literature on CSO is mainly based on the independence assumption of data, which shows that the solution of CSO is asymptotically consistent and enjoys a finite sample guarantee. The independence assumption, however, does not typically hold in many important applications with dependence patterns, such as time series analysis, operational control, and reinforcement learning. In this paper, we aim to fill this gap and consider a Sample Average Approximation (SAA) for CSO with dependent data. Leveraging covariance inequalities and independent block sampling technique, we provide theoretical guarantees of SAA for CSO with dependent data. In particular, we show that SAA for CSO retains asymptotic consistency and a finite sample guarantee under mild conditions. In addition, we establish the sample complexity $O(d / \varepsilon^4)$ of SAA for CSO, which is shown to be of the same order as independent cases. Through experiments on several applications, we verify the theoretical results and demonstrate that dependence does not degrade the performance of the SAA approach in real data applications.
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 | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".