Towards robust interpretable surrogates for optimization

Marc Goerigk et al.

Annals of Operations Research2026https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-026-07101-4article
AJG 3ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

An important factor in the practical implementation of optimization models is the acceptance by the intended users. This is influenced among other factors by the interpretability of the solution process. Decision rules that meet this requirement can be generated using the framework for inherently interpretable optimization models. In practice, there is often uncertainty about the parameters of an optimization problem. An established way to deal with this challenge is the concept of robust optimization. The goal of our work is to combine both concepts: to create decision trees as surrogates for the optimization process that are more robust to perturbations and still inherently interpretable. For this purpose we present suitable models based on different variants to model uncertainty, and solution methods. Furthermore, the applicability of heuristic methods to perform this task is evaluated. Both approaches are compared with the existing framework for inherently interpretable optimization models.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-026-07101-4

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{marc2026,
  title        = {{Towards robust interpretable surrogates for optimization}},
  author       = {Marc Goerigk et al.},
  journal      = {Annals of Operations Research},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-026-07101-4},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Towards robust interpretable surrogates for optimization

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.