← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明
本页整理公开书目信息，不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成，未完成全文核验，可能有误；具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本，未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要；缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
本页为预印本版本；arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历，都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对，只展示已核实例，档案仍可能误合并。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录，不合计多个记录；关联记录可能包含正式发表版本，不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零，引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配，同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列，再参考通用方法与发表日期。
分类依据与纠错
分类依据题名和摘要中的方法词与领域语境，不使用期刊名称猜测研究方向。
反馈分类问题
正在核对关联版本…
代码、数据与补充材料
正在核对对应版本的资源…
关注这篇论文的作者
原文摘要
Predict-then-optimize methods learn a mapping from features to unknown edge costs. They then solve the shortest-path problem on the predicted costs. We study a feature-free alternative for the case where the decision-maker observes many noisy cost vectors on a fixed network. The cost vectors are denoised by an eigenvalue decomposition (PCA) of their covariance matrix. Dijkstra's algorithm then runs on the result. We test this on the $5\times5$ grid of \citet{elmachtoub2022}, with $1000$ independent replications and a fresh ground truth in each. We compare against SPO+, against naive Dijkstra on noisy costs, and against two alternatives to a hand-picked rank $k$ (the Gavish-Donoho threshold and a Ledoit-Wolf filter). We also test a hybrid of SPO+ and PCA. Four findings emerge. First, the rank matters. Keeping $k=2$ components performs worse than no denoising. Second, when costs are close to linear in the features, the Gavish-Donoho threshold recovers the true rank without supervision. PCA-denoised Dijkstra outperforms SPO+ at $°=1$, but underperforms SPO+ at $°\geq 2$. The hybrid works best at $°=1$ and is slightly better than SPO+ at $°=2$. Third, when costs are strongly nonlinear ($°=4$), the signal is no longer low-rank, and only the Ledoit-Wolf filter clearly beats the naive baseline. Fourth, the benefit of denoising grows with network size on grids, but not on a layered non-grid network at high nonlinearity.