analiza aiqbench
The paper treats data-driven decision policies as a risk problem, not just an average-performance one. It splits regret into a standard post-sample term and a "sample-risk premium" from tail risk that averaging hides, and it shows the premium can dominate in some settings. For ML practitioners, the main takeaway is that optimizing expected loss can leave a large tail-risk gap, and that gap can shrink more slowly than the average regret. The numerical results are finite-sample and specific to SAA, so the magnitudes should be read as illustrative rather than general.
How Risky Is Your Data-Driven Policy?
arXiv:2611.04292v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Data-driven algorithms are ubiquitous across industries, and there is an extensive literature on analyzing their \emph{average} performance. The risk profile of such algorithms, while critical, is much less understood. This paper quantifies the risk of data-driven policies and isolates its sources. We evaluate a policy through the conditional value-at-risk (CVaR) of its loss over the training sample, any policy randomization, and the future outcome, at a fixed unknown distribution. Regret against an oracle that knows the distribution decomposes into expected post-sample regret (PS), the average outcome-only CVaR gap of the selected action, and a sample-risk premium (SR), the additional tail risk omitted by averaging those evaluations. The analogous premium vanishes under expected loss. We characterize when the premium vanishes and how large it is relative to post-sample regret. For losses with a continuous density near the tail cutoff, we identify conditions under which both components decay at the same rate, yet the limiting ratio of the premium to post-sample regret can reach the thousands. When a probability mass at the cutoff moves with the action, the premium can decay more slowly and dominate post-sample regret. We establish conditions under which sample average approximation learns the oracle action at rate $n^{-1/2}$ in both settings, but its combined-risk regret is of order $n^{-1}$ in the first and $n^{-1/2}$ in the second. In finite-sample numerical examples of SAA in both settings, the premium accounts for approximately $74\%$--$97\%$ of regret.
Title:How Risky Is Your Data-Driven Policy?
Abstract:Data-driven algorithms are ubiquitous across industries, and there is an extensive literature on analyzing their \emph{average} performance. The risk profile of such algorithms, while critical, is much less understood. This paper quantifies the risk of data-driven policies and isolates its sources. We evaluate a policy through the conditional value-at-risk (CVaR) of its loss over the training sample, any policy randomization, and the future outcome, at a fixed unknown distribution. Regret against an oracle that knows the distribution decomposes into expected post-sample regret (PS), the average outcome-only CVaR gap of the selected action, and a sample-risk premium (SR), the additional tail risk omitted by averaging those evaluations. The analogous premium vanishes under expected loss. We characterize when the premium vanishes and how large it is relative to post-sample regret. For losses with a continuous density near the tail cutoff, we identify conditions under which both components decay at the same rate, yet the limiting ratio of the premium to post-sample regret can reach the thousands. When a probability mass at the cutoff moves with the action, the premium can decay more slowly and dominate post-sample regret. We establish conditions under which sample average approximation learns the oracle action at rate $n^{-1/2}$ in both settings, but its combined-risk regret is of order $n^{-1}$ in the first and $n^{-1/2}$ in the second. In finite-sample numerical examples of SAA in both settings, the premium accounts for approximately $74\%$--$97\%$ of regret.
Machine Learning (stat.ML); Machine Learning (cs.LG); Optimization and Control (math.OC)
arXiv:2611.04292 [stat.ML]
(or arXiv:2611.04292v1 [stat.ML] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2611.04292 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 343 cuvinte