Interior Point Solving for LP-based prediction+optimisation
Jayanta Mandi, Tias Guns
Abstract
Solving optimization problems is the key to decision making in many real-life analytics applications. However, the coefficients of the optimization problems are often uncertain and dependent on external factors, such as future demand or energy or stock prices. Machine learning (ML) models, especially neural networks, are increasingly being used to estimate these coefficients in a datadriven way. Hence, end-to-end predict-and-optimize approaches, which consider how effective the predicted values are to solve the optimization problem, have received increasing attention. In case of integer linear programming problems, a popular approach to overcome their non-differentiabilty is to add a quadratic penalty term to the continuous relaxation, such that results from differentiating over quadratic programs can be used. Instead we investigate the use of the more principled logarithmic barrier term, as widely used in interior point solvers for linear programming. Specifically, instead of differentiating the KKT conditions, we consider the homogeneous self-dual formulation of the LP and we show the relation between the interior point step direction and corresponding gradients needed for learning. Finally our empirical experiments demonstrate our approach performs as good as if not better than the state-of-the-art QPTL (Quadratic Programming task loss) formulation of Wilder et al. [29] and SPO approach of Elmachtoub and Grigas [12] .
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 57c02642-7d63-4756-bbbc-3dc4c16a67afCited by top-tier papers32
- Implicit MLE: Backpropagating Through Discrete Exponential Family DistributionsMathias Niepert, Pasquale Minervini, Luca FranceschiNeurIPS 2021 · 121 citations
- Decision-Focused Learning without Decision-Making: Learning Locally Optimized Decision LossesSanket Shah, Kai Wang, Bryan Wilder, Andrew Perrault et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 79 citations
- Decision-Focused Learning: Through the Lens of Learning to RankJayanta Mandi, Víctor Bucarey, Maxime Mulamba Ke Tchomba, Tias GunsICML 2022 · 73 citations
- Learning MDPs from Features: Predict-Then-Optimize for Sequential Decision Making by Reinforcement LearningKai Wang, Sanket Shah, Haipeng Chen, Andrew Perrault et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 44 citations
- End-to-end Stochastic Optimization with Energy-based ModelLingkai Kong, Jiaming Cui, Yuchen Zhuang, Rui Feng et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 33 citations
Builds on3
- Differentiation of Blackbox Combinatorial SolversMarin Vlastelica Pogancic, Anselm Paulus, Vít Musil, Georg Martius et al.ICLR 2020 · 341 citations
- Smart Predict-and-Optimize for Hard Combinatorial Optimization ProblemsJayanta Mandi, Emir Demirovic, Peter J. Stuckey, Tias GunsAAAI 2020 · 184 citations
- MIPaaL: Mixed Integer Program as a LayerAaron M. Ferber, Bryan Wilder, Bistra Dilkina, Milind TambeAAAI 2020 · 169 citations
Related papers
- DOGE-Train: Discrete Optimization on GPU with End-to-End TrainingAhmed Abbas, Paul SwobodaAAAI 2024 · 6 citations
- The Perils of Learning Before OptimizingChris Cameron, Jason S. Hartford, Taylor Lundy, Kevin Leyton-BrownAAAI 2022 · 28 citations
- Differentiable Integer Linear ProgrammingZijie Geng, Jie Wang, Xijun Li, Fangzhou Zhu et al.ICLR 2025
- Dynamic Programming for Predict+OptimiseEmir Demirovic, Peter J. Stuckey, Tias Guns, James Bailey et al.AAAI 2020 · 39 citations
- A Divide and Conquer Algorithm for Predict+Optimize with Non-convex ProblemsAli Ugur Guler, Emir Demirovic, Jeffrey Chan, James Bailey et al.AAAI 2022 · 14 citations
