Dissecting the Impact of Model Misspecification in Data-driven Optimization

In contextual optimization, the decision-maker seeks optimal decisions to minimize a cost function, that varies based on observed features. This context is common in many business applications ranging from on-demand delivery and retail operations to portfolio optimization and inventory management. In this paper, we study the learning and optimization approach, which first learns how outcomes result from the features, and then selects optimal decisions based on these outcomes. We focus on the integrated learning and optimization literature, and identify that a lack of control for prediction accuracy can lead to overfitting and a loss of decision effectiveness against simple separate learning and optimization models. Instead, we propose a bi-objective formulation that balances prediction accuracy and cost minimization, termed decision-driven regularization. It also addresses ambiguity in the definition of the cost function via a surrogate that depends on a new hyperparameter. We additionally show that alternative perspectives for formulating the problem, namely robust optimization and regret minimization, lead to models that are closely related to our proposed model. As a consequence, our framework generalizes models such as SPO+. Our model is shown to be numerically superior to other benchmarks, such as OLS, Random Forest, XGBoost, SPO+, Perturbation Gradient, and Learning and Rank, in our synthetic studies.

We propose a scalable method for training prediction (machine learning) models in the predict-then-optimize paradigm, where model outputs serve as coefficients for a subsequent linear optimization task. Directly minimizing the empirical decision regret is intractable for linear programming and combinatorial optimization since the decision mapping is piecewise constant, and the gradients are zero almost everywhere. While existing methods address this by smoothing the differentiation process, they suffer from scalability issues, since a computationally expensive solver call is required for every gradient evaluation. To address this, we propose a decision-focused learning pipeline based on a measure transformation principle, which yields a new surrogate loss that is completely optimization-solver-free during training. We establish theoretical guarantees, including Fisher consistency and excess risk bounds. Empirically, our method achieves decision quality competitive with state-of-the-art methods while reducing training time by orders of magnitude.

Estimation error in machine learning prognostic models can propagate into poor maintenance decisions. We study a data-driven predictive maintenance problem coupling health-condition estimation with a joint ordering-replacement model. We show that the conventional Estimate-Then-Optimize (ETO) approach yields inconsistent, suboptimal decisions for a broad class of such problems. To bridge the gap, we propose an Integrated Estimate-Optimize (IEO) framework that directly targets maintenance cost as the prognostic learning objective, bypassing surrogate statistical accuracy metrics such as Kullback--Leibler divergence or mean squared error. Theoretically, we prove out-of-sample performance guarantees of the IEO framework under certain conditions, including i.i.d. and sliding-window data-generating processes. Computationally, we develop a training procedure combining Monte Carlo dropout, central-difference gradient approximation, and an ETO warm-start to handle discrete maintenance decisions and nonlinear costs. Experiments on the four CMAPSS subsets demonstrate that, under the nominal setting, IEO reduces mean maintenance cost by 14.8--22.7% relative to ETO and by 7.2--11.8% relative to a decision-oriented baseline, while also reducing failure rates and cost variation. These improvements are obtained despite higher prediction errors. Increasing the ratio of unplanned-downtime costs to planned-downtime costs makes this tradeoff more pronounced: IEO shifts predictions further toward RUL underestimation, accompanied by greater cost savings and fewer failures. These findings support aligning prognostic learning with maintenance objectives when imperfect predictions must guide decisions under costly unplanned downtime.