Skip to main content
Log in

On robust optimization of two-stage systems

  • Published:
Mathematical Programming Submit manuscript

Abstract.

Robust-optimization models belong to a special class of stochastic programs, where the traditional expected cost minimization objective is replaced by one that explicitly addresses cost variability. This paper explores robust optimization in the context of two-stage planning systems. We show that, under arbitrary measures for variability, the robust optimization approach might lead to suboptimal solutions to the second-stage planning problem. As a result, the variability of the second-stage costs may be underestimated, thereby defeating the intended purpose of the model. We propose sufficient conditions on the variability measure to remedy this problem. Under the proposed conditions, a robust optimization model can be efficiently solved using a variant of the L-shaped decomposition algorithm for traditional stochastic linear programs. We apply the proposed framework to standard stochastic-programming test problems and to an application that arises in auctioning excess electric power.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ahmed, S., Sahinidis, N.V.: Robust process planning under uncertainty. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 37(5), 1883–1892 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bai, D., Carpenter, T., Mulvey, J.M.: Making a case for robust models. Management Sci. 43, 895–907 (1997)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Bawa, V.: Optimal rules for ordering uncertain prospects. J. Financial Economics 2(1), 95–121 (1975)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Birge, J.R., Louveaux, F.: Introduction to Stochastic Programming, Springer Verlag, 1997

  5. Birge, J.R.: Option methods for incorporating risk into linear capacity planning models. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management 2(1), 19–31 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fishburn, P.C.: Mean-risk analysis with risk associated with below-target returns. American Economic Rev. 67(2), 116–125 (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Geoffrion, A. M.: Generalized Benders decomposition. J. Optim. Theory & Appl. 10, 237–260 (1972)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Huang, C.-F., Litzenberger, R.H.: Foundations for Financial Economics. Prentice Hall, 1988

  9. Kall, P., Wallace, S.W.: Stochastic Programming. John Wiley & Sons, 1994

  10. King, A.J.: Asymmetric risk measures and tracking models for portfolio optimization under uncertainty. Ann. Operations Res. 45, 165–177 (1993)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. King, A.J., Takriti, S., Ahmed, S.: Issues in risk modeling for multi-stage systems. IBM Research Report, RC-20993, 1997

  12. King, A.J.: Duality and martingales: a stochastic programming perspective on contingent claims. Math. Programming 91(3), 543–562 (2002)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Laguna, M.: Applying robust optimization to capacity expansion of one location in telecommunications with demand uncertainty. Management Sci. 44, S101–S110 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Linderoth, J., Shapiro, A., Wright, S.: The empirical behavior of sampling methods for stochastic programming. Optimization Technical Report 02-01, Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin, January 2002, http://www.cs.wisc.edu/∼swright/

  15. Luenberger, D.G.: Investment Science. Oxford University Press, 1998

  16. Mak, W.-K., Morton, D.P., Wood, R.K.: Monte Carlo bounding techniques for determining solution quality in stochastic programs. Operations Res. Lett. 24, 47–56 (1999)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Malcolm, S.A., Zenios, S.A.: Robust optimization of power systems capacity expansion under uncertainty. J. operational res. soc. 45, 1040–1049 (1994)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Mulvey, J.M., Vanderbei, R.J., Zenios, S.A.: Robust optimization of large-scale systems. Operations Res. 43, 264–281 (1995)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Mulvey, J.M., Ruszczyński, A.: A new scenario decomposition method for large scale stochastic optimization. Operations Res. 43, 477–490 (1995)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Nawrocki, D.: A brief history of downside risk measures. J. Investing 9–26, Fall 1999

  21. Porter, R.B.: Semivariance and stochastic dominance: A comparison, the American economic review, 64(1), 200–204 (1974)

  22. Rockafellar, R.T.: Convex Analysis, Princeton University Press, 1970

  23. Sen, S., Higle, J.L.: An introductory tutorial on stochastic linear programming. Interfaces 29, 33–61 (1999)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Takriti, S., Krasenbrink, B., Wu, L.S.-Y.: Incorporating fuel constraints and electricity spot prices into the stochastic unit commitment problem. Operations Research 48(2), 268–280 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. van Slyke, R., Wets, R.J.-B.: L-shaped linear programs with applications to linear control and stochastic programming. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 17(4), 638–663 (1969)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samer Takriti.

Additional information

Mathematics Subject Classification (1991): 90C15, 90C33, 90B50, 90A09, 90A43

Supported in part by NSF Grants DMI-0099726 and DMI-0133943

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Takriti, S., Ahmed, S. On robust optimization of two-stage systems. Math. Program., Ser. A 99, 109–126 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10107-003-0373-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10107-003-0373-y

Keywords

Navigation