Convergence analysis of sampling-based decomposition methods for risk-averse multistage stochastic convex programs

We consider a class of sampling-based decomposition methods to solve risk-averse multistage stochastic convex programs. We prove a formula for the computation of the cuts necessary to build the outer linearizations of the recourse functions. This formula can be used to obtain an efficient implementation of Stochastic Dual Dynamic Programming applied to convex nonlinear problems. We prove the almost sure convergence of these decomposition methods when the relatively complete recourse assumption holds. We also prove the almost sure convergence of these algorithms when applied to risk-averse multistage stochastic linear programs that do not satisfy the relatively complete recourse assumption. The analysis is first done assuming the underlying stochastic process is interstage independent and discrete, with a finite set of possible realizations at each stage. We then indicate two ways of extending the methods and convergence analysis to the case when the process is interstage dependent.

Multistep stochastic mirror descent for risk-averse convex stochastic programs based on extended polyhedral risk measures

We consider risk-averse convex stochastic programs expressed in terms of extended polyhedral risk measures. We derive computable con dence intervals on the optimal value of such stochastic programs using the Robust Stochastic Approximation and the Stochastic Mirror Descent (SMD) algorithms. When the objective functions are uniformly convex, we also propose a multistep extension of the Stochastic Mirror Descent algorithm and obtain con dence intervals on both the optimal values and optimal solutions. Numerical simulations show that our con dence intervals are much less conservative and are quicker to compute than previously obtained con dence intervals for SMD and that the multistep Stochastic Mirror Descent algorithm can obtain a good approximate solution much quicker than its nonmultistep counterpart. Our con dence intervals are also more reliable than asymptotic con dence intervals when the sample size is not much larger than the problem size.