-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 62
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Markov graph + Risk aversion #722
Comments
It's this. Which is also the the worst case scenario of the entire tree. I don't find this a very useful risk measure, because it is too cautious. |
This is exactly what I need! Maybe I'm understanding something wrong, so I prepared this small case to illustrate:
In this problem, I just want to empty the reservoir optimally. There are 2 markov states. One of them gets a little worse over time and the other gets a lot better over time. |
Your risk measure is equivalent to the expectation: help?> SDDP.EAVaR(lambda=0.0, beta=1.0)
EAVaR(;lambda=1.0, beta=1.0)
A risk measure that is a convex combination of Expectation and Average Value @ Risk (also called
Conditional Value @ Risk).
λ * E[x] + (1 - λ) * AV@R(β)[x]
Keyword Arguments
–––––––––––––––––––
• lambda: Convex weight on the expectation ((1-lambda) weight is put on the AV@R component.
Inreasing values of lambda are less risk averse (more weight on expectation).
• beta: The quantile at which to calculate the Average Value @ Risk. Increasing values of beta
are less risk averse. If beta=0, then the AV@R component is the worst case risk measure. use instead help?> SDDP.WorstCase()
WorstCase()
The worst-case risk measure. Places all of the probability weight on the worst outcome. |
I chose the beta value wrongly, I wanted to make beta=0 instead of beta=1. With this fix, I'm getting the results I expected, thank you. |
No problem |
I'm using Markovian policy graphs and the results don't make sense to me when I use worst-case.
I would like to better understand how SDDP.jl handles these two features together. What would be the worst case scenario? Is it the worst case scenario over all nodes in layer t+1? Or will it receive a cut referring to the worst case scenario for each node in the next layer, referring to the current forward/backward?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: