Learning Optimal Distributionally Robust Individualized Treatment Rules Integrating Multi-Source Data

Reweighting source samples to match a target covariate distribution is a standard response to distribution shift when generalizing evidence from one population to another. This strategy is well suited to deterministic, learnable covariate discrepancies, but can be insufficient when source--target population differences also contain changes beyond covariate shift or when estimation of the density-ratio weights is unstable. To address this challenge, we introduce a new model that allows non-systematic changes between two population laws after systematic shifts are accounted for. Such residual shift is modeled as random perturbations to the probability space that cannot be represented in a learnable way. In this way, we separate systematic shifts, treated as bias and corrected by reweighting, from residual random perturbations, treated as distributional uncertainty and handled through dataset pooling. Under pure random perturbations, this principle yields Augmented Inverse Distance Weighting (AIDW), which uses regression augmentation and variance-optimal dataset-level pooling. For mixed shifts, we develop Augmented Inverse Hybrid Weighting (AIHW), which interpolates between AIDW and standard augmented importance weighting. Both methods trade off sampling uncertainty and distributional uncertainty via a distributional distance that describes the strength of random perturbations. We establish asymptotic properties of the methods, together with plug-in guidance for choosing tuning parameters and model diagnostic tools. Experiments on three real-world multi-site datasets demonstrate consistent reductions in mean-squared error compared with standard weighting baselines, along with substantially improved empirical coverage in settings where covariate-shift adjustment alone undercovers, showing the robustness of the proposed methods across diverse distribution shift scenarios.

Distributional shifts arise when the target deployment environment differs from the source environment that generated the training data. Robust learning frameworks such as Distributionally Robust Optimization (DRO) and Robust Satisficing (RS) aim to address this challenge, yet their finite-sample guarantees under such shifts, and their systematic comparison, remain underexplored: existing analyses typically establish guarantees either in the source environment or for adversarial worst-case performance over an ambiguity set. This paper instead studies generalization error in the target environment---the excess loss under the shifted target distribution. Our contributions are threefold. First, we derive finite-sample generalization error bounds in the shifted target environment for both DRO and RS. These bounds explicitly characterize the trade-off between reduced sensitivity to shift and the regularization penalty induced by each method's robustness hyperparameter, and they avoid the curse of dimensionality associated with Wasserstein empirical concentration. Second, when partial shift information such as shift magnitude or direction is available, we propose information-directed hyperparameter calibrations and compare the two methods given the same information. Under these calibrations, and in the partial-information regimes we study, DRO and RS exhibit complementary theoretical and empirical behavior. Finally, we apply the framework to a network lot-sizing problem, using it to interpret how robust policies respond to positive shifts in the demand distribution. Together, these results fill a gap in understanding the statistical properties of robust learning methods under distributional shifts and provide a principled basis for comparing DRO and RS.

Distributionally robust optimization (DRO) protects decisions against distributional uncertainty by optimizing over an ambiguity set, but poorly aligned set geometry can require large radii and yield overly conservative decisions. We introduce diagnostic-transport DRO (DT-DRO), which uses held-out calibration data to adapt the ambiguity-set geometry to observed predictive errors. DT-DRO uses the conditional probability integral transform cumulative distribution function to diagnose systematic probability misallocation and translates this information into an outcome-level transport that jointly adjusts the ambiguity-set center and ground cost. The resulting formulation admits a computationally tractable dual reformulation. Theoretically, we derive valid ambiguity radii and decision-risk guarantees that tighten as estimation and approximation errors vanish, and show that DT-DRO can eliminate the nonvanishing robustness floor caused by model misspecification. Synthetic experiments and a power-outage application demonstrate improved decision quality, particularly under structural and tail misspecification.