An Information Utility Based on Estimated Variance

Authors

  • Logan Perry Author
  • Peter Hoffman Author
  • Caleb Hamilton Author

Abstract

Improved knowledge-gradient allocation still depends on how observation uncertainty is learned. Unknown-variance ranking makes that dependency explicit. Evaluation should vary pilot precision and retain complete measurement paths, identifying alternatives starved after a misleading early estimate. A better utility calculation cannot compensate for uncertainty inputs that were never adequately measured. This focused synthesis develops an empirical comparison that preserves the terminal action, observation process, and total verification cost. Its proposed tests are prospective; no new simulation run, model-training result, or intervention effect is reported.

References

  1. J. Du, S. Gao, and I. Ryzhov, “Revisiting an Open Question in Ranking and Selection under Unknown Variances,” Proceedings of the 2025 Winter Simulation Conference, pp. 378–389, 2025.
  2. L. Yang, S. Gao, and C. Ho, “Improving the Knowledge Gradient Algorithm,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 61747–61758, 2023.
  3. Glasserman, Paul. Monte Carlo Methods in Financial Engineering. Springer, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-21617-1.
  4. Ankenman, Bruce, Barry L. Nelson, and Jeremy Staum. “Stochastic Kriging for Simulation Metamodeling.” Operations Research, vol. 58, no. 2, 2010, pp. 371–382. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.1090.0754.
  5. Kim, Seong-Hee, and Barry L. Nelson. “A Fully Sequential Procedure for Indifference-Zone Selection in Simulation.” ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, vol. 11, no. 3, 2001, pp. 251–273. https://doi.org/10.1145/502109.502111.
  6. Chick, Stephen E., and Koichiro Inoue. “New Two-Stage and Sequential Procedures for Selecting the Best Simulated System.” Operations Research, vol. 49, no. 5, 2001, pp. 732–743. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.49.5.732.10615.
  7. Frazier, Peter I., Warren B. Powell, and Savas Dayanik. “A Knowledge-Gradient Policy for Sequential Information Collection.” SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, vol. 47, no. 5, 2008, pp. 2410–2439. https://doi.org/10.1137/070693424.
  8. Rasmussen, Carl Edward, and Christopher K. I. Williams. Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning. MIT Press, 2006. https://gaussianprocess.org/gpml/.
  9. Sacks, Jerome, William J. Welch, Toby J. Mitchell, and Henry P. Wynn. “Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments.” Statistical Science, vol. 4, no. 4, 1989, pp. 409–423. https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177012413.
  10. Bertsimas, Dimitris, and Melvyn Sim. “The Price of Robustness.” Operations Research, vol. 52, no. 1, 2004, pp. 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.1030.0065.

Downloads

Published

2025-08-29

Issue

Section

Articles