Optimization Under Uncertainty

  • Urmila M. Diwekar
Part of the Applied Optimization book series (APOP, volume 80)


In previous chapters, we looked at various optimization problems. Depending on the decision variables, objectives, and constraints, the problems were classified as LP, NLP, IP, MILP, or MINLP. However, as stated above, the future cannot be perfectly forcasted but instead should be considered random or uncertain. Optimization under uncertainty refers to this branch of optimization where there are uncertainties involved in the data or the model, and is popularly known as Stochastic Programming or stochastic optimization problems. In this terminology, stochastic refers to the randomness, and programming refers to the mathematical programming techniques like LP, NLP, IP, MILP, and MINLP. In the discrete optimization chapter, we came across probabilistic techniques like Simulated Annealing and Genetic Algorithms; these techniques are sometimes referred to as the stochastic optimization techniques because of the probabilistic nature of the method. In general, however, Stochastic Programming and stochastic optimization involves optimal decision making under uncertainty. For example, consider the LP example stated in Chapter 2 where, instead of having a fixed maximum supply of chemical X2, the supply can be uncertain, as shown in the following Stochastic Programming (optimization) problem.


Master Problem Uncertain Variable Latin Hypercube Sampling Chance Constraint Stochastic Optimization Problem 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Birge J. R. (1997), Stochastic Programming computation and applications, Informs journal on computing, 19(2),111.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Birge J. R. and F. Louveaux (1997), Introduction to Stochastic Programming, Springer Series in Operations Research, Springer, New York, NYzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beale E.M. L. (1955), On minimizing a convex function subject to linear inequalities,/. Royal Statistical Society, 17B, 173.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Charnes A. and W. W. Cooper (1959), Chanceconstrained programming, Management Science, 5, 73.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chaudhuri P. and U. M. Diwekar (1996), Synthesis under uncertainty: A penalty function approach, AIChE Journal, 42,742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chaudhuri P. (1996), Process synthesis under uncertainty, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Environmental Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chaudhuri P. and U. Diwekar (1999), Synthesis approach to optimal waste blend under uncertainty, AIChE Journal, 45,1671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dantzig G. B. (1955), Linear programming under uncertainty, Management Science, 1,197.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dantzig G. B. and P. Glynn (1990), Parallel processors for planning under uncertainty, Annals of Operations Research, 22,1.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dantzig G. B. and G. Infanger (1991), Large scale stochastic linear programs-Importance sampling and bender decomposition, Computational and Applied Mathematics, Brezinski and U. Kulisch Eds., 111.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dantzig G. B. and P. Wolfe (1960), The decomposition principle for linear programs, Operations Research, 8,101.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Diwekar U. M. (1995), A process analysis approach to pollution prevention, AIChE Symposium Series on Pollution Prevention through Process and Product Modifications, 90,168.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Diwekar U. M. and J. R. Kalagnanam (1997), An efficient sampling technique for optimization under uncertainty, AIChE Journal, 43,440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Diwekar U. M. and E. S. Rubin (1994), Parameter design method using Stochastic Optimization with ASPEN, Industrial Engineering Chemistry Research, 33,292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Diwekar U. M. and E.S. Rubin (1991), Stochastic modeling of chemical Processes, Computers and Chemical Engineering, 15,105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Edgeworth E. (1888), The mathematical theory of banking, /. Royal Statistical Society, 51,113.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Higle J. and S. Sen (1991), Stochastic decomposition: an algorithm for two stage linear programs with recourse, Mathematics of Operations Research, 16,650.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hopkins, D. F., M. Hoza, and C. A. Lo Presti (1994), FY94 Optimal Waste Loading Models Development, Report prepared for U.S. Department of Energy under contract DEAC06–76RLO 1830.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Illman D. L. (1993), Researchers take up environmental challenge at Hanford, Chemical and Engineering News, 9, July 21.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Iman R. L. and W. J. Conover (1982), Small sample sensitivity analysis techniques for computer models, with an application to risk assessment, Communications in Statistics, A17,1749.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Iman R. L. and J. C. Helton (1988), An investigation of uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques for computer models, Risk Analysis, 8(1), 71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Iman, R.J. and Shortencarier, M.J. (1984), A FORTRAN77 Program and User’s Guide for Generation of Latin Hypercube and Random Samples for Use with Computer Models, NUREG/CR3624, SAND83–2365, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, N.M.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    James B. A. R, Variance reduction techniques (1985), /. Operations Research Society, 36(6), 525.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Luckacs (1960), Characteristic functions, Charles Griffin, London.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kalagnanam J. R. and U. M. Diwekar (1997), An efficient sampling technique for offline quality control, Technometrics, 39(3),308.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Knuth D. E. (1973), The Art of Computer Programming, Volume 1: Fundamental Algorithms, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Madansky A.(1960), Inequalities for stochastic linear programming problems, Management Science, 6,197.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    McKay M. D., R. J. Beckman, and W. J. Conover (1979), A comparison of three methods of selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code, Technometrics, 21(2) 239.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Milton J. S. and J. C. Arnold (1995), Introduction to Probability and Statistics : Principles and Applications for Engineering and the Computing Sciences, McGraw Hill, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Morgan G. and M. Henrion (1990), Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Narayan, V., Diwekar U.M. and Hoza M. (1996), Synthesizing optimal waste blends, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Research, 35,3519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Niederreiter, H. (1992), Random Number Generation and Quasi–Monte Carlo methods, SIAM Publications, Philadelphia, PA.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Nemhauser, G. L., A. H. G. Ronnooy Kan, and M. J. Todd (1989), Optimization: Handbooks in operations research and management science, Vol. 1. North-Holland Press: New York.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Painton, L. A. and U. M. Diwekar (1995), Stochastic Annealing under uncertainty, European Journal of Operations Research, 83,489.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Petruzzi N. C. and M. Dada (1999), Pricing and the newsvendor problem: a review with extensions, Operations Research, 47(2), 183.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Prékopa A. (1980), Logarithmic concave measures and related topics, in Stochastic Programming, M. A. H. Dempster M. A. H., Ed., Academic Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Prékopa A (1995) Stochastic Programming, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Raiffa H. and R. Schlaifer (1961), Applied Stastical Decision Theory, Harvard University, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Saliby E. (1990), Descriptive sampling: A better approach to Monte Carlo simulations,/. Operations Research Society, 41(12,1133.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Taguchi G. (1986), Introduction to Quality Engineering, Asian Productivity Center, Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tintner G. (1955), Stochastic linear programming with applications to agricultural economics, In Proc. 2nd Symp. Lin. Progr., Washington, 197.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Vajda S. (1972), Probabilistic programming, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Van Slyke R. and R. J. B. Wets (1969), Lshaped linear programs with application to optimal control and Stochastic Programming, SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 17,638.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wets R-J-B (1990), Stochastic Programming, in Optimization Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science, Volumel, G. L. Nemhauser, A. H.G. Rinooy Kan, and M. J. Todd, Eds., North-Holland, Amsterdam (1990).Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wets R. J. B (1996), Challenges in Stochastic Programming, Math.Progr., 75,115.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Urmila M. Diwekar
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Uncertain Systems: Tools for Optimization & Management, Department of Chemical Engineering, and Institute for Environmental Science & PolicyUniversity of Illinois at ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations