Debiasing In-Sample Policy Performance for Small-Data, Large-Scale Optimization
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Motivated by the poor performance of cross-validation in settings where data are scarce, we propose a novel estimator of the out-of-sample performance of a policy in data-driven optimization.Our approach exploits the optimization problem's sensitivity analysis to estimate the gradient of the optimal objective value with respect to the amount of noise in the data and uses the estimated gradient to debias the policy's in-sample performance. Unlike cross-validation techniques, our approach avoids sacrificing data for a test set, utilizes all data when training and, hence, is well-suited to settings where data are scarce. We prove bounds on the bias and variance of our estimator for optimization problems with uncertain linear objectives but known, potentially non-convex, feasible regions. For more specialized optimization problems where the feasible region is "weakly-coupled" in a certain sense, we prove stronger results. Specifically, we provide explicit high-probability bounds on the error of our estimator that hold uniformly over a policy class and depends on the problem's dimension and policy class's complexity. Our bounds show that under mild conditions, the error of our estimator vanishes as the dimension of the optimization problem grows, even if the amount of available data remains small and constant. Said differently, we prove our estimator performs well in the small-data, large-scale regime. Finally, we numerically compare our proposed method to state-of-the-art approaches through a case-study on dispatching emergency medical response services using real data. Our method provides more accurate estimates of out-of-sample performance and learns better-performing policies.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 26 Jul 2021.
Builds on
0 of 0 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 2; 2023: 3; 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
10 papers.
- 2023A Survey of Contextual Optimization Methods for Decision Making under Uncertaintycited by 81
- 2021Integrated Conditional Estimation-Optimizationcited by 25
- 2023Estimate-Then-Optimize versus Integrated-Estimation-Optimization versus Sample Average Approximation: A Stochastic Dominance Perspectivecited by 19
- 2024Decision-Focused Learning with Directional Gradientscited by 16
- 2023Optimizer's Information Criterion: Dissecting and Correcting Bias in Data-Driven Optimizationcited by 4
- 2022Off-Policy Evaluation with Policy-Dependent Optimization Responsecited by 3
- 2026Winner's Curse Drives False Promises in Data-Driven Decisions: A Case Study in Refugee Matchingcited by 3
- 2022Data-Driven Influence Functions for Optimization-Based Causal Inferencecited by 1
- 2025Stability Regularized Cross-Validationcited by 0
- 2026The Value of Human Expertisecited by 0
- 2026The Value of Human Expertise26 Aug 2026
- 2026Winner's Curse Drives False Promises in Data-Driven Decisions: A Case Study in Refugee Matching9 Feb 2026
- 2025Stability Regularized Cross-Validation11 May 2025
- 2024Decision-Focused Learning with Directional Gradients5 Feb 2024
- 2023A Survey of Contextual Optimization Methods for Decision Making under Uncertainty17 Jun 2023
- 2023Optimizer's Information Criterion: Dissecting and Correcting Bias in Data-Driven Optimization16 Jun 2023
- 2023Estimate-Then-Optimize versus Integrated-Estimation-Optimization versus Sample Average Approximation: A Stochastic Dominance Perspective13 Apr 2023
- 2022Data-Driven Influence Functions for Optimization-Based Causal Inference29 Aug 2022
- 2022Off-Policy Evaluation with Policy-Dependent Optimization Response25 Feb 2022
- 2021Integrated Conditional Estimation-Optimization24 Oct 2021