A data-driven approach to beating SAA out-of-sample

While solutions of Distributionally Robust Optimization (DRO) problems can sometimes have a higher out-of-sample expected reward than the Sample Average Approximation (SAA), there is no guarantee. In this paper, we introduce the class of Distributionally Optimistic Optimization (DOO) models, and show that it is always possible to "beat" SAA out-of-sample if we consider not just worst-case (DRO) models but also best-case (DOO) ones. We also show, however, that this comes at a cost: Optimistic solutions are more sensitive to model error than either worst-case or SAA optimizers, and hence are less robust.

Worst-case sensitivity

We introduce the notion of Worst-Case Sensitivity, defined as the worst-case rate of increase in the expected cost of a Distributionally Robust Optimization (DRO) model when the size of the uncertainty set vanishes. We show that worst-case sensitivity is a Generalized Measure of Deviation and that a large class of DRO models are essentially mean-(worst-case) sensitivity problems when uncertainty sets are small, unifying recent results on the relationship between DRO and regularized empirical optimization with worst-case sensitivity playing the role of the regularizer. More generally, DRO solutions can be sensitive to the family and size of the uncertainty set, and reflect the properties of its worst-case sensitivity. We derive closed-form expressions of worst-case sensitivity for well known uncertainty sets including smooth $\phi$-divergence, total variation, "budgeted" uncertainty sets, uncertainty sets corresponding to a convex combination of expected value and CVaR, and the Wasserstein metric. These can be used to select the uncertainty set and its size for a given application.