Risk-Adaptive Approaches to Stochastic Optimization: A Survey
0
⚙️
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Uncertainty is a common challenge in fields like engineering, data analysis, and decision-making.
- To address this uncertainty, researchers often use conservative optimization models that incorporate measures of risk and related concepts.
- This paper surveys the rapid development of risk measures over the last 25 years, tracing their origins in financial engineering and their spread to other areas.
- Risk measures provide a general framework for handling uncertainty, with significant computational and theoretical advantages.
Plain English Explanation
Uncertainty is a fact of life, especially in complex fields like engineering, data analysis, and decision-making. When faced with uncertain situations, researchers and professionals often try to be extra cautious by using optimization models that account for risk and related concepts.
Over the past 25 years, there has been a lot of progress in developing these "risk measures." The ideas first emerged in the world of finance, but have since been applied to nearly all areas of engineering and applied mathematics.
Risk measures provide a general framework for dealing with uncertainty. They are based on solid mathematical principles, which gives them some key advantages, like being easier to compute and analyze theoretically. The paper explains the key facts about risk measures, provides some concrete algorithms, and points readers to further reading on the topic.
The paper also discusses how risk measures connect to utility theory and distributionally robust optimization. It highlights some emerging application areas, like fair machine learning, and defines measures of reliability.
Technical Explanation
The paper surveys the rapid development of risk measures over the last quarter century. Risk measures originated in the field of financial engineering, but have since spread to nearly all areas of engineering and applied mathematics.
At their core, risk measures provide a general framework for handling uncertainty based on the principles of convex analysis. This framework offers significant computational and theoretical advantages compared to other approaches.
The paper outlines the key facts about risk measures, including their mathematical underpinnings and connections to related concepts like utility theory and distributionally robust optimization. It also lists several concrete algorithms for working with risk measures.
The authors note that risk measures are now being applied to emerging areas like fair machine learning, where they can be used to define measures of reliability. Throughout the paper, the authors provide an extensive list of references for further reading on this rapidly evolving field.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a comprehensive survey of the development of risk measures over the past 25 years. It highlights the versatility of this mathematical framework and its applicability across a wide range of domains.
One potential limitation mentioned in the paper is the inherent risk-averseness of the optimization models that incorporate risk measures. While this conservatism can be advantageous in many situations, it may not always align with the objectives or preferences of decision-makers.
Additionally, the paper does not delve deeply into the computational challenges that can arise when working with complex risk measures, particularly in high-dimensional or data-intensive applications. Further research may be needed to address scalability and efficiency concerns.
The authors also note the close connections between risk measures, utility theory, and distributionally robust optimization. Exploring these linkages in greater depth could yield valuable insights and guide the development of more sophisticated modeling approaches.
Overall, the paper serves as a valuable reference for researchers and practitioners interested in understanding the state of the art in risk-aware optimization and decision-making. By encouraging critical thinking and further exploration, it contributes to the ongoing advancement of this important field.
Conclusion
This paper provides a comprehensive survey of the rapid development of risk measures over the past 25 years. Risk measures have evolved from their origins in financial engineering to become a widely-applicable framework for handling uncertainty in a wide range of engineering, data-driven, and decision-making contexts.
The key advantages of risk measures are their solid mathematical foundations in convex analysis and their ability to offer significant computational and theoretical benefits. The paper outlines the core concepts, lists relevant algorithms, and points readers to further resources for exploring this rapidly evolving field.
As the applications of risk measures continue to expand, this survey serves as a valuable reference for researchers and practitioners seeking to understand the state of the art and the potential future directions in risk-aware optimization and decision-making. By highlighting both the strengths and limitations of the current approaches, the paper encourages critical thinking and further advancements in this important area.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
⚙️
0
Risk-Adaptive Approaches to Stochastic Optimization: A Survey
Johannes O. Royset
Uncertainty is prevalent in engineering design, data-driven problems, and decision making broadly. Due to inherent risk-averseness and ambiguity about assumptions, it is common to address uncertainty by formulating and solving conservative optimization models expressed using measures of risk and related concepts. We survey the rapid development of risk measures over the last quarter century. From their beginning in financial engineering, we recount the spread to nearly all areas of engineering and applied mathematics. Solidly rooted in convex analysis, risk measures furnish a general framework for handling uncertainty with significant computational and theoretical advantages. We describe the key facts, list several concrete algorithms, and provide an extensive list of references for further reading. The survey recalls connections with utility theory and distributionally robust optimization, points to emerging applications areas such as fair machine learning, and defines measures of reliability.
Read more4/5/2024
👀
0
Predictive Uncertainty Quantification via Risk Decompositions for Strictly Proper Scoring Rules
Nikita Kotelevskii, Maxim Panov
Uncertainty quantification in predictive modeling often relies on ad hoc methods as there is no universally accepted formal framework for that. This paper introduces a theoretical approach to understanding uncertainty through statistical risks, distinguishing between aleatoric (data-related) and epistemic (model-related) uncertainties. We explain how to split pointwise risk into Bayes risk and excess risk. In particular, we show that excess risk, related to epistemic uncertainty, aligns with Bregman divergences. To turn considered risk measures into actual uncertainty estimates, we suggest using the Bayesian approach by approximating the risks with the help of posterior distributions. We tested our method on image datasets, evaluating its performance in detecting out-of-distribution and misclassified data using the AUROC metric. Our results confirm the effectiveness of the considered approach and offer practical guidance for estimating uncertainty in real-world applications.
Read more6/7/2024
🤿
0
A Structured Review of Literature on Uncertainty in Machine Learning & Deep Learning
Fahimeh Fakour, Ali Mosleh, Ramin Ramezani
The adaptation and use of Machine Learning (ML) in our daily lives has led to concerns in lack of transparency, privacy, reliability, among others. As a result, we are seeing research in niche areas such as interpretability, causality, bias and fairness, and reliability. In this survey paper, we focus on a critical concern for adaptation of ML in risk-sensitive applications, namely understanding and quantifying uncertainty. Our paper approaches this topic in a structured way, providing a review of the literature in the various facets that uncertainty is enveloped in the ML process. We begin by defining uncertainty and its categories (e.g., aleatoric and epistemic), understanding sources of uncertainty (e.g., data and model), and how uncertainty can be assessed in terms of uncertainty quantification techniques (Ensembles, Bayesian Neural Networks, etc.). As part of our assessment and understanding of uncertainty in the ML realm, we cover metrics for uncertainty quantification for a single sample, dataset, and metrics for accuracy of the uncertainty estimation itself. This is followed by discussions on calibration (model and uncertainty), and decision making under uncertainty. Thus, we provide a more complete treatment of uncertainty: from the sources of uncertainty to the decision-making process. We have focused the review of uncertainty quantification methods on Deep Learning (DL), while providing the necessary background for uncertainty discussion within ML in general. Key contributions in this review are broadening the scope of uncertainty discussion, as well as an updated review of uncertainty quantification methods in DL.
Read more6/4/2024
💬
0
A Reliability Theory of Compromise Decisions for Large-Scale Stochastic Programs
Shuotao Diao, Suvrajeet Sen
Stochastic programming models can lead to very large-scale optimization problems for which it may be impossible to enumerate all possible scenarios. In such cases, one adopts a sampling-based solution methodology in which case the reliability of the resulting decisions may be suspect. For such instances, it is advisable to adopt methodologies that promote variance reduction. One such approach goes under a framework known as compromise decision, which requires multiple replications of the solution procedure. This paper studies the reliability of stochastic programming solutions resulting from the compromise decision process. This process is characterized by minimizing an aggregation of objective function approximations across replications, presumably conducted in parallel. We refer to the post-parallel-processing problem as the problem of compromise decision. We quantify the reliability of compromise decisions by estimating the expectation and variance of the pessimistic distance of sampled instances from the set of true optimal decisions. Such pessimistic distance is defined as an estimate of the largest possible distance of the solution of the sampled instance from the true optimal solution set. The Rademacher average of instances is used to bound the sample complexity of the compromise decision.
Read more5/20/2024