BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Dick den Hertog

Dick den Hertog appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
math.OCphysics.med-ph

Catalog footprint

What is connected

8works
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

8 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Pareto Adaptive Robust Optimality via a Fourier-Motzkin Elimination Lens

We formalize the concept of Pareto Adaptive Robust Optimality (PARO) for linear Adaptive Robust Optimization (ARO) problems. A worst-case optimal solution pair of here-and-now decisions and wait-and-see decisions is PARO if it cannot be Pareto dominated by another solution, i.e., there does not exist another such pair that performs at least as good in all scenarios in the uncertainty set and strictly better in at least one scenario. We argue that, unlike PARO, extant solution approaches -- including those that adopt Pareto Robust Optimality from static robust optimization -- could fail in ARO and yield solutions that can be Pareto dominated. The latter could lead to inefficiencies and suboptimal performance in practice. We prove the existence of PARO solutions, and present particular approaches for finding and approximating such solutions. We present numerical results for a facility location problem that demonstrate the practical value of PARO solutions. Our analysis of PARO relies on an application of Fourier-Motzkin Elimination as a proof technique. We demonstrate how this technique can be valuable in the analysis of ARO problems, besides PARO. In particular, we employ it to devise more concise and more insightful proofs of known results on (worst-case) optimality of decision rule structures.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Adjustable robust treatment-length optimization in radiation therapy

Traditionally, optimization of radiation therapy (RT) treatment plans has been done before the initiation of RT course, using population-wide estimates for patients' response to therapy. However, recent technological advancements have enabled monitoring individual patient response during the RT course, in the form of biomarkers. Although biomarker data remains subject to substantial uncertainties, information extracted from this data may allow the RT plan to be adapted in a biologically informative way. We present a mathematical framework that optimally adapts the treatment-length of an RT plan based on the acquired mid-treatment biomarker information, while accounting for the inexact nature of this information. We formulate the adaptive treatment-length optimization problem as a 2-stage problem, wherein the information about the model parameters gathered during the first stage influences the decisions in the second stage. Using Adjustable Robust Optimization (ARO) techniques we derive explicit optimal decision rules for the stage-2 decisions and solve the optimization problem. The problem allows for multiple worst-case optimal solutions. To discriminate between these, we introduce the concept of Pareto Adjustable Robustly Optimal (PARO) solutions. In numerical experiments using lung cancer patient data, the ARO method is benchmarked against several other static and adaptive methods. In case of exact biomarker information, there is sufficient space to adapt, and numerical results show that taking into account both robustness and adaptability is not necessary. In case of inexact biomarker information, accounting for adaptability and inexactness of biomarker information is particularly beneficial when robustness (w.r.t. organ-at-risk (OAR) constraint violations) is of high importance. If minor OAR violations are allowed, a nominal folding horizon approach is a good performing alternative.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

Extending the Scope of Robust Quadratic Optimization

We derive computationally tractable formulations of the robust counterparts of convex quadratic and conic quadratic constraints that are concave in matrix-valued uncertain parameters. We do this for a broad range of uncertainty sets. In particular, we show how to reformulate the support functions of uncertainty sets represented in terms of matrix norms and cones. Our results provide extensions to known results from the literature. We also consider hard quadratic constraints; those that are convex in uncertain matrix-valued parameters. For the robust counterpart of such constraints we derive inner and outer tractable approximations. As application, we show how to construct a natural uncertainty set based on a statistical confidence set around a sample mean vector and covariance matrix and use this to provide a tractable reformulation of the robust counterpart of an uncertain portfolio optimization problem. We also apply the results of this paper to a norm approximation and a regression line problem.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Dwell time modulation restrictions do not necessarily improve treatment plan quality for prostate HDR brachytherapy

Inverse planning algorithms for dwell time optimisation in interstitial high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy may produce solutions with large dwell time variations within catheters, which may result in undesirable selective high-dose subvolumes. Extending the optimisation model with a dwell time modulation restriction (DTMR) that limits dwell time differences between neighboring dwell positions has been suggested to eliminate this issue. DTMRs may additionally reduce the sensitivity for uncertainties in dwell positions that result from catheter reconstruction errors and source positioning inaccuracies. This study quantifies the reduction of high-dose subvolumes and the robustness against these uncertainties by applying a DTMR to template-based prostate HDR brachytherapy implants. Three different DTMRs were consecutively applied to a linear dose-based penalty model (LD) and a dose-volume based model (LDV), both obtained from literature. The models were solved with DTMR levels ranging from no restriction to uniform dwell times within catheters. Uncertainties were simulated on clinical cases using in-house developed software, and dose-volume metrics were calculated in each simulation. For the assessment of high-dose subvolumes, the dose homogeneity index (DHI) and the contiguous dose volume histogram were analysed. Robustness was measured by the improvement of the lowest $D_{90\%}$ of the planning target volume (PTV) observed in the simulations. For (LD), a DTMR yields an increase in DHI of 30% and reduces the size of the largest high-dose volume by 2 to 5 cc. This came at a cost of a reduction in $D_{90\%}$ of the PTV of 10%, which often implies that it drops below the desired minimum of 100%. For (LDV), none of the DTMRs improved high-dose volume measures. DTMRs were not capable of improving robustness of PTV $D_{90\%}$ against uncertainty in dwell positions for both models.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

A Practical Guide to Robust Optimization

Robust optimization is a young and active research field that has been mainly developed in the last 15 years. Robust optimization is very useful for practice, since it is tailored to the information at hand, and it leads to computationally tractable formulations. It is therefore remarkable that real-life applications of robust optimization are still lagging behind; there is much more potential for real-life applications than has been exploited hitherto. The aim of this paper is to help practitioners to understand robust optimization and to successfully apply it in practice. We provide a brief introduction to robust optimization, and also describe important do's and don'ts for using it in practice. We use many small examples to illustrate our discussions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Approximating the Pareto set of multiobjective linear programs via Robust Optimization

We consider problems with multiple linear objectives and linear constraints and use Adjustable Robust Optimization and Polynomial Optimization as tools to approximate the Pareto set with polynomials of arbitrarily large degree. The main difference with existing techniques is that we optimize a single (extended) optimization problem that provides a polynomial approximation whereas existing methods iteratively construct a piecewise linear approximation. One of the advantages of the proposed method is that it is more useful for visualizing the Pareto set.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Robust counterparts of inequalities containing sums of maxima of linear functions

This paper addresses the robust counterparts of optimization problems containing sums of maxima of linear functions. These problems include many practical problems, e.g.~problems with sums of absolute values, and arise when taking the robust counterpart of a linear inequality that is affine in the decision variables, affine in a parameter with box uncertainty, and affine in a parameter with general uncertainty. In the literature, often the reformulation is used that is exact when there is no uncertainty. However, in robust optimization this reformulation gives an inferior solution and provides a pessimistic view. We observe that in many papers this conservatism is not mentioned. Some papers have recognized this problem, but existing solutions are either conservative or their performance for different uncertainty regions is not known, a comparison between them is not available, and they are restricted to specific problems. We describe techniques for general problems and compare them with numerical examples in inventory management, regression and brachytherapy. Based on these examples, we give recommendations for reducing the conservatism.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Mixed integer programming improves comprehensibility and plan quality in inverse optimization of prostate HDR-brachytherapy

Current inverse treatment planning methods that optimize both catheter positions and dwell times in prostate HDR brachytherapy use surrogate linear or quadratic objective functions that have no direct interpretation in terms of dose-volume histogram (DVH) criteria, do not result in an optimum or have long solution times. We decrease the solution time of existing linear and quadratic dose-based programming models (LP and QP, respectively) to allow optimizing over potential catheter positions using mixed integer programming. An additional average speed-up of 75% can be obtained by stopping the solver at an early stage, without deterioration of the plan quality. For a fixed catheter configuration, the dwell time optimization model LP solves to optimality in less than 15 seconds, which confirms earlier results. We propose an iterative procedure for QP that allows to prescribe the target dose as an interval, while retaining independence between the solution time and the number of dose calculation points. This iterative procedure is comparable in speed to the LP model, and produces better plans than the non-iterative QP. We formulate a new dose-volume based model that maximizes $V_{100\%}$ while satisfying pre-set DVH-criteria. This model optimizes both catheter positions and dwell times within a few minutes depending on prostate volume and number of catheters, optimizes dwell times within 35 seconds, and gives better DVH statistics than dose-based models. The solutions suggest that the correlation between objective value and clinical plan quality is weak in existing dose-based models.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access