Johannes O. Royset

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.

Johannes O. Royset, Louis L. Chen, Eric Eckstrand

In practice, optimization models are often prone to unavoidable inaccuracies due to dubious assumptions and corrupted data. Traditionally, this placed special emphasis on risk-based and robust formulations, and their focus on ``conservative" decisions. We develop, in contrast, an ``optimistic" framework based on Rockafellian relaxations in which optimization is conducted not only over the original decision space but also jointly with a choice of model perturbation. The framework enables us to address challenging problems with ambiguous probability distributions from the areas of two-stage stochastic optimization without relatively complete recourse, probability functions lacking continuity properties, expectation constraints, and outlier analysis. We are also able to circumvent the fundamental difficulty in stochastic optimization that convergence of distributions fails to guarantee convergence of expectations. The framework centers on the novel concepts of exact and limit-exact Rockafellians, with interpretations of ``negative'' regularization emerging in certain settings. We illustrate the role of Phi-divergence, examine rates of convergence under changing distributions, and explore extensions to first-order optimality conditions. The main development is free of assumptions about convexity, smoothness, and even continuity of objective functions. Numerical results in the setting of computer vision and text analytics with label noise illustrate the framework.

Young In Kim, Andrea Agiollo, Pratiksha Agrawal et al.

Optimization algorithms that seek flatter minima, such as Sharpness-Aware Minimization (SAM), are credited with improved generalization and robustness to noise. We ask whether such gains impact membership privacy. Surprisingly, we find that SAM is more prone to Membership Inference Attacks (MIA) than classical SGD across multiple datasets and attack methods, despite achieving lower test error. This suggests that the geometric mechanism of SAM that improves generalization simultaneously exacerbates membership leakage. We investigate this phenomenon through extensive analysis of memorization and influence scores. Our results reveal that SAM is more capable of capturing atypical subpatterns, leading to higher memorization scores of samples. Conversely, SGD depends more heavily on majority features, exhibiting worse generalization on atypical subgroups and lower memorization. Crucially, this characteristic of SAM can be linked to lower variance in the prediction confidence of unseen samples, thereby amplifying membership signals. Finally, we model SAM under a perfectly interpolating linear regime and theoretically show that sharpness regularization inherently reduces variance, guaranteeing a higher MIA advantage for confidence and likelihood ratio attacks.

Johannes O. Royset

Solutions of bilevel optimization problems tend to suffer from instability under changes to problem data. In the optimistic setting, we construct a lifted formulation that exhibits desirable stability properties under mild assumptions that neither invoke convexity nor smoothness. The upper- and lower-level problems might involve integer restrictions and disjunctive constraints. In a range of results, we invoke at most pointwise and local calmness for the lower-level problem in a sense that holds broadly. The lifted formulation is computationally attractive with structural properties being brought out and an outer approximation algorithm becoming available.

Johannes O. Royset

In the context of structured nonconvex optimization, we estimate the increase in minimum value for a decision that is robust to parameter perturbations as compared to the value of a nominal problem. The estimates rely on detailed expressions for subgradients and local Lipschitz moduli of min-value functions in nonconvex robust optimization and require only the solution of the nominal problem. The theoretical results are illustrated by examples from military operations research involving mixed-integer optimization models. Across 54 cases examined, the median error in estimating the increase in minimum value is 12%. Therefore, the derived expressions for subgradients and local Lipschitz moduli may accurately inform analysts about the possibility of obtaining cost-effective, parameter-robust decisions in nonconvex optimization.

Johannes O. Royset

Approximations of optimization problems arise in computational procedures and sensitivity analysis. The resulting effect on solutions can be significant, with even small approximations of components of a problem translating into large errors in the solutions. We specify conditions under which approximations are well behaved in the sense of minimizers, stationary points, and level-sets and this leads to a framework of consistent approximations. The framework is developed for a broad class of composite problems, which are neither convex nor smooth. We demonstrate the framework using examples from stochastic optimization, neural-network based machine learning, distributionally robust optimization, penalty and augmented Lagrangian methods, interior-point methods, homotopy methods, smoothing methods, extended nonlinear programming, difference-of-convex programming, and multi-objective optimization. An enhanced proximal method illustrates the algorithmic possibilities. A quantitative analysis supplements the development by furnishing rates of convergence.

Johannes O. Royset, Ji-Eun Byun

Gradients and subgradients are central to optimization and sensitivity analysis of buffered failure probabilities. We furnish a characterization of subgradients based on subdifferential calculus in the case of finite probability distributions and, under additional assumptions, also a gradient expression for general distributions. Several examples illustrate the application of the results, especially in the context of optimality conditions.

Johannes O. Royset

A basic requirement for a mathematical model is often that its solution (output) shouldn't change much if the model's parameters (input) are perturbed. This is important because the exact values of parameters may not be known and one would like to avoid being mislead by an output obtained using incorrect values. Thus, it's rarely enough to address an application by formulating a model, solving the resulting optimization problem and presenting the solution as the answer. One would need to confirm that the model is suitable, i.e., "good," and this can, at least in part, be achieved by considering a family of optimization problems constructed by perturbing parameters of concern. The resulting sensitivity analysis uncovers troubling situations with unstable solutions, which we referred to as "bad" models, and indicates better model formulations. Embedding an actual problem of interest within a family of problems is also a primary path to optimality conditions as well as computationally attractive, alternative problems, which under ideal circumstances, and when properly tuned, may even furnish the minimum value of the actual problem. The tuning of these alternative problems turns out to be intimately tied to finding multipliers in optimality conditions and thus emerges as a main component of several optimization algorithms. In fact, the tuning amounts to solving certain dual optimization problems. In this tutorial, we'll discuss the opportunities and insights afforded by this broad perspective.

Matthew Norton, Johannes O. Royset

The theoretical and empirical performance of Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM) often suffers when loss functions are poorly behaved with large Lipschitz moduli and spurious sharp minimizers. We propose and analyze a counterpart to ERM called Diametrical Risk Minimization (DRM), which accounts for worst-case empirical risks within neighborhoods in parameter space. DRM has generalization bounds that are independent of Lipschitz moduli for convex as well as nonconvex problems and it can be implemented using a practical algorithm based on stochastic gradient descent. Numerical results illustrate the ability of DRM to find quality solutions with low generalization error in sharp empirical risk landscapes from benchmark neural network classification problems with corrupted labels.