Search

We study a robust monopoly pricing problem with a minimax regret objective, where a seller endeavors to sell multiple goods to a single buyer, only knowing that the buyer's values for the goods range over a rectangular uncertainty set. We interpret this pricing problem as a zero-sum game between the seller, who chooses a selling mechanism, and a fictitious adversary or 'nature', who chooses the buyer's values from within the uncertainty set. Using duality techniques rooted in robust optimization, we prove that this game admits a Nash equilibrium in mixed strategies that can be computed in closed form. The Nash strategy of the seller is a randomized posted price mechanism under which the goods are sold separately, while the Nash strategy of nature is a distribution on the uncertainty set under which the buyer's values are comonotonic. We further show that the restriction of the pricing problem to deterministic mechanisms is solved by a deteministic posted price mechanism under which the goods are sold separately. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Wasserstein balls, which contain all probability measures within a pre-specified Wasserstein distance to a reference measure, have recently enjoyed wide popularity in the distributionally robust optimization and machine learning communities to formulate and solve data-driven optimization problems with rigorous statistical guarantees. In this technical note we prove that the Wasserstein ball is weakly compact under mild conditions, and we offer necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of optimal solutions. We also characterize the sparsity of solutions if the Wasserstein ball is centred at a discrete reference measure. In comparison with the existing literature, which has proved similar results under different conditions, our proofs are self-contained and shorter, yet mathematically rigorous, and our necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of optimal solutions are easily verifiable in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In distributionally robust optimization the probability distribution of the uncertain problem parameters is itself uncertain, and a fictitious adversary, e.g., nature, chooses the worst distribution from within a known ambiguity set. A common shortcoming of most existing distributionally robust optimization models is that their ambiguity sets contain pathological discrete distributions that give nature too much freedom to inflict damage. We thus introduce a new class of ambiguity sets that contain only distributions with sum-of-squares (SOS) polynomial density functions of known degrees. We show that these ambiguity sets are highly expressive as they conveniently accommodate distributional information about higher-order moments, conditional probabilities, conditional moments or marginal distributions. Exploiting the theoretical properties of a measure-based hierarchy for polynomial optimization due to Lasserre (SIAM J Optim 21(3):864–885, 2011), we prove that certain worst-case expectation constraints are polynomial-time solvable under these new ambiguity sets. We also show how SOS densities can be used to approximately solve the general problem of moments. We showcase the applicability of the proposed approach in the context of a stylized portfolio optimization problem and a risk aggregation problem of an insurance company. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We consider stochastic programs where the distribution of the uncertain parameters is only observable through a finite training dataset. Using the Wasserstein metric, we construct a ball in the space of (multivariate and non-discrete) probability distributions centered at the uniform distribution on the training samples, and we seek decisions that perform best in view of the worst-case distribution within this Wasserstein ball. The state-of-the-art methods for solving the resulting distributionally robust optimization problems rely on global optimization techniques, which quickly become computationally excruciating. In this paper we demonstrate that, under mild assumptions, the distributionally robust optimization problems over Wasserstein balls can in fact be reformulated as finite convex programs—in many interesting cases even as tractable linear programs. Leveraging recent measure concentration results, we also show that their solutions enjoy powerful finite-sample performance guarantees. Our theoretical results are exemplified in mean-risk portfolio optimization as well as uncertainty quantification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although stochastic programming problems were always believed to be computationally challenging, this perception has only recently received a theoretical justification by the seminal work of Dyer and Stougie (Math Program A 106(3):423-432, 2006). Amongst others, that paper argues that linear two-stage stochastic programs with fixed recourse are #P-hard even if the random problem data is governed by independent uniform distributions. We show that Dyer and Stougie's proof is not correct, and we offer a correction which establishes the stronger result that even the approximate solution of such problems is #P-hard for a sufficiently high accuracy. We also provide new results which indicate that linear two-stage stochastic programs with random recourse seem even more challenging to solve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Linear stochastic programming provides a flexible toolbox for analyzing real-life decision situations, but it can become computationally cumbersome when recourse decisions are involved. The latter are usually modeled as decision rules, i.e., functions of the uncertain problem data. It has recently been argued that stochastic programs can quite generally be made tractable by restricting the space of decision rules to those that exhibit a linear data dependence. In this paper, we propose an efficient method to estimate the approximation error introduced by this rather drastic means of complexity reduction: we apply the linear decision rule restriction not only to the primal but also to a dual version of the stochastic program. By employing techniques that are commonly used in modern robust optimization, we show that both arising approximate problems are equivalent to tractable linear or semidefinite programs of moderate sizes. The gap between their optimal values estimates the loss of optimality incurred by the linear decision rule approximation. Our method remains applicable if the stochastic program has random recourse and multiple decision stages. It also extends to cases involving ambiguous probability distributions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]