Papers › Differentiating Through Dual Prices: End-to-End Policy Learning Under Capacity Constraints

Differentiating Through Dual Prices: End-to-End Policy Learning Under Capacity Constraints

5 Aug 2026arXiv:2608.04669added by Syntology

Mohammadsaeed Haghi, Mahdi Salmani, Nima Kelidari

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Many social services assign scarce resources, such as housing assistance or hospital interventions, to people who arrive one at a time: each arrival must receive a decision immediately, and the long-run usage of every resource must stay within its capacity. We study how to learn such an assignment policy from logged observational data. The standard pipeline is decision-blind: fit one outcome model per arm by regression, price each capacitated resource from the fitted models, and assign each arrival the arm whose predicted outcome minus price is largest. We instead train the outcome models end-to-end, differentiating an off-policy estimate of the deployed policy's value through the dual prices themselves. We study two formulations: an exact nonconvex one, and a convex relaxation whose optimum always satisfies the capacity constraints in expectation and which is suboptimal by at most a term linear in the smoothing temperature and logarithmic in the number of arms. Every method is evaluated in a queueing simulation with resources replenished at their capacity rates. Across six datasets, the two end-to-end variants take the top slots on a deployment-adjusted value index at every delay cost, including zero; when capacities are binding, decision-blind baselines frequently violate them and incur much longer queueing delays. On the largest dataset, a hospital cohort of seventy thousand patients, end-to-end training also achieves significantly higher policy value, a margin that survives a capacity-matched neural baseline. Flexible decision-blind regression remains the stronger pure predictor where ground truth is measurable; end-to-end training is best suited to settings where resources are genuinely scarce and feasibility matters.

Code

Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Syntology holds the repository link but has not harvested or run code from it.

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2608.04669, was issued in August 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections