A linear programming based heuristic framework for min-max regret combinatorial optimization problems with interval costs

This work deals with a class of problems under interval data uncertainty, namely interval robust-hard problems, composed of interval data min-max regret generalizations of classical NP-hard combinatorial problems modeled as 0-1 integer linear programming problems. These problems are more challenging than other interval data min-max regret problems, as solely computing the cost of any feasible solution requires solving an instance of an NP-hard problem. The state-of-the-art exact algorithms in the literature are based on the generation of a possibly exponential number of cuts. As each cut separation involves the resolution of an NP-hard classical optimization problem, the size of the instances that can be solved efficiently is relatively small. To smooth this issue, we present a modeling technique for interval robust-hard problems in the context of a heuristic framework. The heuristic obtains feasible solutions by exploring dual information of a linearly relaxed model associated with the classical optimization problem counterpart. Computational experiments for interval data min-max regret versions of the restricted shortest path problem and the set covering problem show that our heuristic is able to find optimal or near-optimal solutions and also improves the primal bounds obtained by a state-of-the-art exact algorithm and a 2-approximation procedure for interval data min-max regret problems

Generalization Bounds in the Predict-then-Optimize Framework

The predict-then-optimize framework is fundamental in many practical settings: predict the unknown parameters of an optimization problem, and then solve the problem using the predicted values of the parameters. A natural loss function in this environment is to consider the cost of the decisions induced by the predicted parameters, in contrast to the prediction error of the parameters. This loss function was recently introduced in Elmachtoub and Grigas (2017) and referred to as the Smart Predict-then-Optimize (SPO) loss. In this work, we seek to provide bounds on how well the performance of a prediction model fit on training data generalizes out-of-sample, in the context of the SPO loss. Since the SPO loss is non-convex and non-Lipschitz, standard results for deriving generalization bounds do not apply. We first derive bounds based on the Natarajan dimension that, in the case of a polyhedral feasible region, scale at most logarithmically in the number of extreme points, but, in the case of a general convex feasible region, have linear dependence on the decision dimension. By exploiting the structure of the SPO loss function and a key property of the feasible region, which we denote as the strength property, we can dramatically improve the dependence on the decision and feature dimensions. Our approach and analysis rely on placing a margin around problematic predictions that do not yield unique optimal solutions, and then providing generalization bounds in the context of a modified margin SPO loss function that is Lipschitz continuous. Finally, we characterize the strength property and show that the modified SPO loss can be computed efficiently for both strongly convex bodies and polytopes with an explicit extreme point representation.Comment: Preliminary version in NeurIPS 201

On the Number of Iterations for Dantzig-Wolfe Optimization and Packing-Covering Approximation Algorithms

We give a lower bound on the iteration complexity of a natural class of Lagrangean-relaxation algorithms for approximately solving packing/covering linear programs. We show that, given an input with $m$ random 0/1-constraints on $n$ variables, with high probability, any such algorithm requires $\Omega(\rho \log(m)/\epsilon^2)$ iterations to compute a $(1+\epsilon)$-approximate solution, where $\rho$ is the width of the input. The bound is tight for a range of the parameters $(m,n,\rho,\epsilon)$. The algorithms in the class include Dantzig-Wolfe decomposition, Benders' decomposition, Lagrangean relaxation as developed by Held and Karp [1971] for lower-bounding TSP, and many others (e.g. by Plotkin, Shmoys, and Tardos [1988] and Grigoriadis and Khachiyan [1996]). To prove the bound, we use a discrepancy argument to show an analogous lower bound on the support size of $(1+\epsilon)$-approximate mixed strategies for random two-player zero-sum 0/1-matrix games