Decision-Driven Regularization: A Blended Model for Learning and 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.

End-to-End Fairness Optimization with Fair Decision-Focused Learning

Many real-world systems rely on predictive models to inform decisions, and fairness concerns arise in both the prediction and decision stages. We introduce end-to-end fairness optimization (E2EFO) as a unifying framework that integrates fairness across the prediction-to-decision pipeline. We focus on resource allocation with group-based fairness: the prediction task estimates allocation impacts while limiting accuracy disparity across groups, and the decision task distributes those impacts equitably by optimizing a group-based alpha-fairness measure. Within this framework, we propose fair decision-focused learning (FDFL), a training paradigm that jointly accounts for prediction accuracy, prediction fairness, and decision regret -- the loss in decision fairness due to imperfect predictions. FDFL trains the predictor by gradient descent, combining the objective gradients through multi-task learning techniques. The core computational challenge is the decision Jacobian with respect to the predictor parameters: we derive exact closed-form formulas for a tractable class of fair allocation and apply a differentiable optimization layer in the general case. We further establish a finite-sample generalization bound for the scalarized FDFL objective. Numerical experiments on a healthcare-based single resource allocation and a synthetic multiple resource allocation illustrate the value of jointly accounting for prediction fairness and decision fairness in prediction-informed decision-making.

Smart predict-then-robustly-optimize

In this paper, we propose and study a robust variant of the smart predict-then-optimize approach that accounts for prediction shifts due to disturbance in the covariate feature space. While traditional integrated-learning-and-optimization models assume that side information is perfectly revealed, empirical data-driven features are frequently corrupted or noisy at the time of decision-making, leading to fragile operational policies. To bridge this gap, we integrate principles of robust optimization directly into the predictive-prescriptive pipeline via a smart predict-then-robustly optimize loss and establish a computationally tractable convex surrogate, designed to hedge against worst-case feature perturbations. On the theoretical front, we formalize the structural validity of this surrogate by proving its approximation error probability decays exponentially according to a sub-Gaussian concentration profile. Furthermore, we establish that under mild assumptions, the surrogate is Fisher consistent with high probability. We also prove necessary conditions under which our framework outperforms standard smart predict-then-optimize and maintain its superiority even when the standard method is equipped with regularized upstream predictions. Numerical experiments validate that our robust framework consistently yields significant performance improvements over standard methods, both in out-of-sample terms and in training stability.

Learning Predictive Ambiguity Sets for Decision-Focused Distributionally Robust Optimization

Predict-then-optimize systems usually compress uncertainty into a point forecast and then solve a downstream optimization problem as if the forecast were reliable. Distributionally robust optimization (DRO) offers protection against misspecification, but the ambiguity set is often centered at historical samples and uses a fixed radius. We propose \emph{learned predictive ambiguity sets} (LPAS): a deep contextual model outputs a finite nominal scenario distribution, a state-dependent Wasserstein radius, and optionally an anisotropic ground metric. These outputs define a contextual ambiguity set that feeds a DRO decision layer. The radius is trained by a combination of conditional quantile calibration, size regularization, and downstream decision loss, so that robustness is adaptive rather than globally fixed. We derive the finite dual form used by the decision layer, present a staged training algorithm, and evaluate the method on distributionally robust portfolio optimization with 20 S&P 500 constituents from 2018--2026. The proposed method substantially improves over equal-weight, predict-then-optimize, and historical Wasserstein DRO baselines, achieving 26.28% annualized return, Sharpe ratio 1.30, final wealth 1.61, and lower tail loss than a deep fixed-radius DRO baseline while using a smaller average radius. The results show that learned ambiguity radii can recover most of the performance of strong fixed-radius DRO while reducing unnecessary conservatism and improving regime adaptivity.

Decision-Value Attribution in Predict-then-Optimize Systems

Predictive models are increasingly embedded in operational decision-making, yet standard explanation methods typically explain forecasts rather than the decisions those forecasts induce. This distinction is important in predict-then-optimize systems: large forecast changes may leave the optimizer's action unchanged, while small changes can alter the selected decision and its realized value. We propose Decision Value Attribution (DVA), a Shapley-based framework for attributing the value of a fixed prediction--optimization pipeline. The framework defines cooperative games whose payoff is the downstream decision value, allowing the players to be information sources, optimization or design parameters, or both. We present three variants: InfoDVA attributes value to features, DesignDVA attributes value to operational configurations, and Decision-Value Interactions (DVI) quantifies how information and design jointly create value. We further distinguish post-DVA, which evaluates decisions using realized outcomes, from pre-DVA, which evaluates decisions under the model's full prediction. This separation turns attribution into a decision-level diagnostic of whether the model's operational beliefs align with realized performance. The resulting attributions are expressed in the units of the operational objective and decompose the gain or loss relative to a baseline. Case studies in electricity storage arbitrage and emergency medical service coverage show that predictive explanations can be poor proxies for operational value, that DVA can guide targeted information-control interventions, and that optimization configurations determine when predictive information is decision-relevant.

Generating Input Distributions for Explaining Portfolio Optimization Pipelines

We propose a predict-optimize-explain framework that uses gradient-based sample generation to interpret various portfolio models by identifying macroeconomic conditions that induce specified portfolio outcomes. Unlike traditional feature-importance methods, this approach directly probes decision pipelines (predictive models coupled with portfolio optimization) by constructing economically meaningful what-if questions. We focus on four such questions: under what macroeconomic conditions a predict-then-optimize pipeline closes or reverses its return gap with a predict-and-optimize pipeline; what conditions lead a pipeline to diversify rather than concentrate its allocation; when a pipeline trained on calm markets overtakes one trained through crises; and what conditions would let a pipeline match a benchmark return. These examples illustrate how our framework uncovers key behavioral differences between various decision pipelines. Beyond these cases, the proposed framework is flexible and can support a wide range of probing questions tailored to specific portfolio objectives. Our findings highlight the value of integrating prediction, optimization, and explanation to produce more robust and transparent portfolio strategies.

Decision-Focused Learning: When and Why Traditional Prediction Models Fail

Plugging predictions of unknown parameters into downstream optimization problems, often referred to as the ``predict-then-optimize'' paradigm, has long been a standard approach in decision-making under uncertainty. However, improved predictive accuracy does not, in general, translate into improved decision quality. This disconnect has motivated growing interest in decision-focused learning (DFL) within the operations research community. This tutorial reviews recent developments in DFL and highlights key methodological insights, with a particular focus on stochastic linear programming as the downstream decision-making problem. We discuss why several widely used tools in traditional statistical learning are not directly suited to decision-focused settings and must be rethought, including (i) data collection strategies driven purely by predictive uncertainty and (ii) distributional distance measures such as the Wasserstein distance. We summarize properties of DFL that distinguish it from conventional predictive modeling and provide insights into the development of new decision-focused tools.

Scaling Decision-Focused Learning to Large Problems with Lagrangian Decomposition

Decision-focused learning has shown great promise for addressing predict-then-optimize problems, particularly in the presence of under-specified models. However, its practical deployment is often hindered by high computational costs and limited scalability, as it requires solving a constrained optimization problem for each training instance at every iteration. To address these challenges, we propose a novel framework that incorporates Lagrangian decomposition into the decision-focused learning paradigm. Specifically, we introduce a new surrogate objective along with two loss functions for evaluating and training the underlying prediction model. We further propose two variants of our approach, which offer different trade-offs between computational efficiency and solution quality. Our framework can be seamlessly integrated with standard decision-focused learning methods, including Smart Predict-then-Optimize (SPO+) and Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (IMLE). Through experiments on two standard benchmarks, the multi-dimensional knapsack problem and quadratic portfolio optimization, we demonstrate that our approach achieves competitive performance while remaining amenable to parallelization. In particular, it consistently outperforms traditional decision-focused learning methods on large-scale instances, involving up to eight times more variables than those typically considered in related work. The implementation is available at https://github.com/corail-research/DFL-LD.