Henry Aldridge-Krawciw, Irene Aldridge
arXiv 14 Sep 2026 · Econometrics
arXiv:2609.15111 · PDF · Extracted main text
Predict-then-optimize methods such as Smart "Predict, then Optimize" (SPO+) of Elmachtoub and Grigas (2022) learn a mapping from contextual features to unknown edge costs and then solve the induced combinatorial problem on the predicted costs. This approach is powerful but relies on the predictive model being well specified: when the true cost-generating process is nonlinear in the features and the predictor is linear, SPO+'s performance degrades as the misspecification grows. We propose and evaluate a structurally different remedy for a specific but common setting: when the decision-maker observes many noisy realizations of the same underlying cost process, the realized cost vectors themselves can be treated as a noisy signal and denoised directly, via eigenvalue decomposition (equivalently, Principal Component Analysis) of their covariance matrix, before ever invoking a predictive model. We instantiate this idea on the $5\times5$ grid shortest-path benchmark introduced by Elmachtoub and Grigas (2022), retaining only the top-$k$ eigenvectors of the training cost covariance matrix and projecting new noisy cost observations onto that subspace prior to solving with Dijkstra's (1959) algorithm. We find that the choice of $k$ is decisive: keeping only $k{=}2$ eigenvectors discards real signal and underperforms even the naive noisy-cost baseline, while setting $k{=}5$ to match the true latent feature dimension makes eigenvalue-denoised Dijkstra the best-performing method at every misspecification level tested, outperforming SPO+ by a wide margin under high misspecification.
appendix boundary found by none_found · 100% of the source is main text. Read the extracted text to check this.
The works this paper leans on most, across its whole bibliography — not restricted to papers in our corpus. Ranked by composite intensity, which combines how often a work is mentioned, how many sections mention it, and how much of that falls in the main text rather than the appendix.
| Reference | Intensity | Mentions | Sections | Main text | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Elmachtoub, Adam N. and Grigas, Paul (2022) Smart “Predict, then Optimize” | 1.000 | 9 | 4 | 100% |
| 2 | Gavish, Matan and Donoho, David L (2014) The Optimal Hard Threshold for Singular Values is $4/ 3$ | 0.928 | 4 | 4 | 100% |
| 3 | Aldridge, Irene (2026) Regret Equals Covariance: A Closed-Form Characterization for Stochastic Optimization self | 0.843 | 3 | 3 | 100% |
| 4 | Aldridge, Irene (2025) Optimize, Then Predict self | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 5 | Ban, Gah-Yi and Rudin, Cynthia (2019) The Big Data Newsvendor: Practical Insights from Machine Learning | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 6 | Bertsimas, Dimitris and Kallus, Nathan (2020) From Predictive to Prescriptive Analytics | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 7 | Chen, Shigang and Song, Meongchul and Sahni, Sartaj (2004) Two Techniques for Fast Computation of Constrained Shortest Paths | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 8 | Dijkstra, Edsger W (1959) A Note on Two Problems in Connexion with Graphs | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 9 | Donti, Priya and Amos, Brandon and Kolter, J. Zico (2017) Task-Based End-to-End Model Learning in Stochastic Optimization | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
| 10 | Hotelling, Harold (1933) Analysis of a Complex of Statistical Variables into Principal Components | 0.644 | 2 | 2 | 100% |
Showing the top 10 of 14 scored citations.