Sensitivity of functionals of McKean-Vlasov SDE's with respect to the initial distribution

Fausto Gozzi; Filippo de Feo; Nizar Touzi; Salvatore Federico

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Sensitivity of functionals of McKean-Vlasov SDE's with respect to the initial distribution

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The slope of the worst-case criterion over Wasserstein balls around the initial law equals the L2 norm of an adjoint tangent operator.

desk verdict The DRO sensitivity formula is new and plausible, but the proof of the key gradient-process estimates uses a false conditional-law identity, leaving the main theorem unjustified as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.15906 v2 pith:MFRNSIBE submitted 2024-12-20 math.PR

Filippo de Feo , Salvatore Federico , Fausto Gozzi , Nizar Touzi This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.PR MSC 60H1091G45

keywords distributionallyrobustoptimizationMcKean-VlasovSDEWassersteinballL-derivativetangentprocessmodelrisksystemic

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper studies distributionally robust optimization when the underlying model is a McKean-Vlasov stochastic differential equation and the criterion depends on the law of the solution at a terminal time. The authors ask how the worst-case value changes as the initial distribution is allowed to move within a small Wasserstein ball. Their main result states that the right derivative at radius zero equals the L2 norm of the adjoint of the derivative of the terminal state with respect to the initial random variable, applied to the L-derivative of the criterion. This turns a supremum over infinitely many perturbed laws into a single computable quantity, and it extends a known finite-dimensional sensitivity formula to the infinite-dimensional mean-field setting.

What carries the argument

The central object is the tangent operator $D_\xi X_t^\xi$, the Gateaux derivative of the map that sends an $F_0$-measurable initial random variable $\xi$ to the solution $X_t^\xi$ of the McKean-Vlasov SDE at time $t$. It is built from two ingredients: the classical tangent process $\nabla X_t^{\xi,P_\xi}$ solving the linearized SDE with the measure flow frozen, and the partial derivative $\partial_\xi X_t^{\xi,P_\xi}$ capturing the change in the flow of measures, expressed through an auxiliary process $U_t^\xi(\tilde\xi)$ and an expectation over an independent copy. The adjoint $(D_\xi X_T^\xi)^*$ then transports the L-derivative $\partial_x\delta_\mu\varphi(\mu_T,X_T^\xi)$ back into $L^2(F_0)$, and the theorem identifies the DRO sensitivity as the $L^2$ norm of this transported vector. The whole argument uses the L-derivative, the linear functional derivative with respect to the measure argument, as the Wasserstein gradient of the criterion $\varphi$.

What would settle it

Evaluate both sides of Theorem 3.8 numerically for a concrete McKean-Vlasov SDE whose coefficients are Lipschitz but have an unbounded measure derivative, such as $b(x,\mu)=\sin\big(\int y\,\mu(dy)\big)$ with constant volatility and $\varphi(\mu)=\mathrm{Var}$; if the one-sided derivative of the supremum over a $W_2$-ball differs from the $L^2$ norm of the adjoint operator, the boundedness assumption is essential.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For each initial law $\mu_0\in P_2(\mathbb{R}^d)$, the function $r\mapsto \Phi(\mu_0,r)=\sup_{\mu'_0\in B_r^2(\mu_0)}\varphi(\mu'_T)$ is differentiable at $r=0$, with $\partial\Phi/\partial r(\mu_0,0)=\|(D_\xi X_T^\xi)^*\,\partial_x\delta_\mu\varphi(\mu_T,X_T^\xi)\|_{L^2}$. Here $\xi$ is any square-integrable random variable with law $\mu_0$, $D_\xi X_T^\xi$ is the Gateaux derivative of the solution map $\xi\mapsto X_T^\xi$ acting on $L^2$ initial conditions, and $\partial_x\delta_\mu\varphi$ is the L-derivative, or Wasserstein gradient, of the criterion. The proof establishes a two-sided bound: the upper bound approximates the finite difference by the adjoint operator and controls the error through moduli of continuity, while the lower bound constructs a specific perturbed initial law that nearly achieves the supremum. The argument rests on a careful reworking of the gradient process of a McKean-Vlasov SDE with respect to its initial data, establishing Gateaux differentiability, uniform boundedness in operator norm, and uniform strong continuity for both the derivative and its adjoint.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes the model's coefficients change smoothly and boundedly when the state or the whole distribution is perturbed; if the derivative with respect to the measure is unbounded, the key tangent operator may not be bounded, and the $L^2$ norm in the main formula is not justified.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the main formula is correct, the first-order effect of any small Wasserstein perturbation of the initial law is captured by a single $L^2$ norm, so the worst-case direction is explicit: perturb $\xi$ by $\eta=\zeta/\|\zeta\|_{L^2}$, where $\zeta=(D_\xi X_T^\xi)^*\,\partial_x\delta_\mu\varphi(\mu_T,X_T^\xi)$.
The result extends the static sensitivity formula of Bartl, Drapeau, Obłój, and Wiesel to dynamic mean-field models, where the transport map is not Lipschitz in the usual sense but satisfies the regularity established in Theorem 3.7.
In the systemic risk application, the derivative of the worst-case variance of the log-monetary reserve at time $T$ equals $2\,\|(D_\xi X_T^\xi)^*(X_T^\xi-\mathbb{E}[\xi])\|_{L^2}$, giving a closed-form measure of model risk from initial-distribution uncertainty.
Higher-order terms are controlled by moduli of continuity coming from the coefficient derivatives and the criterion's L-derivative, so the formula is stable under small perturbations of the initial law.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

A natural testable extension is to check numerically whether the formula continues to hold for coefficients with unbounded measure derivatives, such as polynomial or trigonometric interactions; the paper's boundedness assumption is used primarily to keep the tangent operator bounded, and a counterexample would mark the true boundary of the result.
The same adjoint-transport mechanism should yield first-order sensitivities for other criteria, such as quantiles or expected shortfall of the terminal law, provided the criterion admits an L-derivative with the stated continuity.
One could read the theorem as an infinitesimal certificate for distributionally robust mean-field games: the worst-case initial law within radius $r$ is asymptotically the shift along $\zeta$, which may inform how model uncertainty propagates through Nash equilibria.
The lower-bound construction, which picks a concrete perturbed initial law attaining the supremum up to errors, suggests an explicit gradient-descent direction for DRO problems over Wasserstein balls in mean-field settings.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper has a real contribution: it extends Bartl–Drapeau–Obłój–Wiesel's DRO sensitivity-at-the-origin result from static/finite-dimensional settings to McKean–Vlasov SDEs, where the initial-law perturbation must be handled through an infinite-dimensional tangent operator. That is genuinely new and worth doing. The systemic-risk application gives an honest illustration of the formula, and the exposition is careful, with proper credit to Buckdahn–Li–Peng–Rainer. The main theorem is also stated cleanly: the derivative is the L2 norm of the adjoint of the tangent flow applied to the L-derivative of the payoff.

But there is a load-bearing gap in the proof of Theorem 3.7. The text repeatedly uses the identity from Remark 4.1 (and its analogue in Remark 4.3): E[X^{ξ,P_ξ}_t | ξ=x0] = E[X^{x0,δ_{x0}}_t]. This is false for genuinely mean-field coefficients. Conditioning on ξ=x0 fixes the initial value of the pathwise SDE, but it does not change the frozen law P_{X^ξ} appearing in the coefficient; X^{x0,δ_{x0}} solves an auxiliary equation with a different frozen flow. The concrete example in the stress-test note—dX_t = tanh(X_t) sin(E[X_t])dt with ξ = ±1 equiprobable—illustrates the failure cleanly. The boundedness, strong-continuity, and Gateaux-differentiability estimates for D_ξ X^ξ_T in Theorem 3.7 are derived using this replacement. So the proof as written does not establish the estimates that Theorem 3.8 leans on.

I think the underlying claims are likely true and repairable: the operators should satisfy standard Gronwall-type estimates directly from the boundedness of the derivatives in Assumption 3.5, without conditioning on the initial law pointwise. But that repair is not in the text, and the current proof of the main theorem has a genuine hole. There are also minor textual issues—references to non-existent items like Theorem 3.7(iii) and Assumption 3.1(iii)—that should be fixed.

Who is this for? Researchers working on distributionally robust optimization in mean-field models, especially in systemic risk. It deserves a serious referee, but the referee should insist on a corrected proof of Theorem 3.7. I would not cite it in its present form; after a repair, I would.

Recommendation: send to peer review, with major revision required before acceptance.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the distributionally robust optimization value Φ(μ0,r)=sup_{μ0′∈B^2_r(μ0)} φ(P_{X_T^{μ0′}}) for a McKean-Vlasov SDE with initial law μ0. The main result, Theorem 3.8, states that under smoothness assumptions on the coefficient and on φ, r↦Φ(μ0,r) is differentiable at r=0 with derivative ‖(DξX_T^ξ)^* ∂_x δ_μ φ(μ_T,X_T^ξ)‖_{L^2}, where DξX_T^ξ is the Gateaux derivative of the solution map ξ↦X_T^ξ. The proof follows the finite-dimensional argument of Bartl, Drapeau, Obłój and Wiesel, and the required regularity of the tangent process is developed in Section 4 by revisiting Buckdahn, Li, Peng and Rainer. An application to the variance of log-monetary reserves in a systemic risk model is given in Section 5.

Significance. If the main theorem is valid, the paper gives a clean, parameter-free first-order sensitivity formula for Wasserstein DRO around a mean-field model, extending the static result of Bartl et al. The formula has a natural interpretation as the L^2 norm of the adjoint tangent operator applied to the L-derivative. The authors correctly identify that Fréchet differentiability fails in general and only Gateaux differentiability is available, and they discuss this in Remark 4.4. The systemic risk example illustrates the result in a model of practical interest. However, the proof of the key regularity theorem contains a false conditional-law identity, so the validity of Theorem 3.7 and hence Theorem 3.8 is not established by the text.

major comments (2)

[§4.1, Remark 4.1 and Remark 4.3; used in proof of Theorem 3.7, Steps 1 and 2] The conditional-law identity E[X^{ξ,ξ}_t | ξ=x0] = E[X^{x0,δ_{x0}}_t] is false for a general reference law μ0=Pξ. Conditioning on ξ=x0 fixes the pathwise initial value of the SDE, but it does not change the frozen law P_{X^ξ} appearing in the coefficient; the right-hand side uses the different frozen law of the McKean-Vlasov flow starting from δ_{x0}. A concrete example satisfying Assumption 3.5 is b(x,μ)=tanh(x) sin(∫ y μ(dy)) with ξ=±1 equally likely. Then E[X_t]=0 and X^ξ_t≡ξ, so the left side conditional on ξ=1 equals 1, while the right side solves x'(t)=tanh(x(t)) sin(x(t)), x(0)=1, which is not identically 1 for t>0. This identity and its analogue in Remark 4.3 are used to justify the conditional equalities in the estimates for E^1_t, E^2_t, I^1_t, and I^2_t in the proof of Theorem 3.7. The displayed equalities there are therefore invalid; as written, the proof does not establish the uniform strong continuity of DξX^ξ_t or the Gateaux differentiability (4.25), and Theorem 3.8 is not justified. The inequalities needed may be recoverable from (4.7)–(4.9), (4.14), and the Lipschitz continuity of the law flow, but the authors must rewrite this part without replacing the frozen law.
[§4.2, Step 2 of the proof of Theorem 3.7] Even apart from the false identity in Remark 4.1, the estimate for I^1_t contains an additional unjustified step. After conditioning on (ξ,η)=(x0,h), the text replaces the frozen law P^{ξ+rη} by P^{x0+rh} and then uses the bound W2(P^{x0+rh}, δ_{x0}) ≤ C|r||h|. But P^{x0+rh} denotes the law of the McKean-Vlasov flow starting from δ_{x0+rh}, not a point mass, and the Wasserstein distance from this law to δ_{x0} is not of order |r||h| in general. The displayed line involving W2(P^{x0+rh}, δ_{x0}) is therefore not a valid estimate. This step is load-bearing for the Gateaux differentiability claim; the authors need to supply a correct O(|r|^2 ‖η‖^2_{L^4}) bound or a different decomposition.

minor comments (4)

[Proof of Theorem 3.8, Steps 1 and 2] The proof refers to “Theorem 3.7 (iii)” and “Assumption 3.1(iii)”, neither of which exists. The intended statements appear to be Theorem 3.7(ii) and Assumption 3.1(ii); without this correction the estimate (3.4) is formally incomplete.
[Lemma 3.4(ii)] The definition of K_R reads sup_{μ0 ∈ B_R^2(μ0)}, which is a ball centered at μ0 and is not meaningful as a uniform bound. Based on the proof, the intended statement is a supremum over μ0 with ‖μ0‖_2 ≤ R or over a fixed ball B_R^2(μ̄0) for some reference μ̄0.
[Section 4.2, proof of Theorem 3.7, Step 1] In the first estimate of the paper, the equality E[|∇X^{ξ,P^ξ}_t η|^2 | (ξ,η)=(x0,h)] = E[|∇X^{x0,δ_{x0}}_t h|^2] is false, but the needed inequality follows directly from (4.7). The authors should replace the equality by the corresponding uniform estimate and avoid invoking Remarks 4.1 and 4.3 for this purpose.
[Section 5, equation (5.4)] The SDE for DξX^ξ_t η uses the identity E[DξX^ξ_s η]=E[η], which is derived from (5.3). This should be stated explicitly before (5.4), since it is not immediate from the definition of DξX^ξ_t.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the DRO sensitivity formula is derived from external McKean-Vlasov differentiability results; no fitted parameter, self-citation, or definitional reduction is load-bearing.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain: Theorem 3.8 characterizes ∂Φ/∂r(μ0,0) as the L2 norm of the adjoint tangent operator applied to the L-derivative of φ. The proof uses the linear-functional-derivative expansion, the integral representation X_T^{ξ'} - X_T^ξ = ∫ Dξ X_T^{ξ^λ3}(ξ'-ξ) dλ3, and the estimates from Theorem 3.7. Theorem 3.7 is proved in Section 4 by proposing the candidate tangent operator Dξ X_t^ξ = ∇X^{ξ,Pξ}_t + ∂_ξ X^{ξ,Pξ}_t in (4.19), verifying that it solves the linearized SDE (4.20), and establishing boundedness and continuity from the external, published estimates of Buckdahn-Li-Peng-Rainer [9] under Assumption 3.5. No parameter is fitted to any data, no 'prediction' is a renamed input, and no uniqueness or ansatz is imported from the present authors' prior work. The self-citations in the paper (e.g., [14], [15], [28]) are motivational or application-related and do not carry the proof. The substantive concern raised by the skeptic, that the conditional-law identity in Remark 4.1 may be false for mean-field interactions, is a mathematical correctness objection to a step of the proof, not a circularity: it does not exhibit a conclusion equivalent to its assumptions or a fitted quantity presented as a prediction. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new entities, particles, forces, or constants. It relies on standard assumptions on the coefficients and the criterion, plus previously published theorems. No free parameters are fitted to data.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Atomless probability space supporting a Brownian motion and independent F0 random variables
Used throughout to construct couplings and optimal transports; standard in the mean-field SDE literature.
domain assumption Assumption 3.1: φ ∈ C^1(P2(R^d)) with polynomial growth and uniform moduli of continuity for its L-derivative
Needed to apply linear functional derivative, L-derivative expansions and the bounds in Lemma 3.4.
domain assumption Assumption 3.5: b ∈ C^{1,1}_b(R^d × P_2(R^d); R^d × R^{d×m}) with bounded and Lipschitz derivatives
Ensures existence, boundedness, and continuity of the tangent process and the derivative operator; this is the main structural restriction on the model.
standard math External results of Buckdahn-Li-Peng-Rainer [9], specifically Lemma 4.1 and Proposition 4.2
Provides the auxiliary flow differentiability and the U-process estimates used in Section 4; treated as black boxes.
standard math Zeidler [31, Theorem 4.A]: mean value theorem for Gateaux differentiable maps with strongly continuous derivative
Used to represent X_T^{ξ'} - X_T^ξ as an integral of the derivative; standard functional analysis.
standard math Wasserstein space and Lions derivative facts from Carmona-Delarue [11]
Gives existence of optimal couplings, the equality W2(μ,δ0)=||μ||2, and properties of the L-derivative.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Sensitivity of functionals of McKean-Vlasov SDE's with respect to the initial distribution." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MFRNSIBE

@misc{pith2026241215906,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Sensitivity of functionals of McKean-Vlasov SDE's with respect to the initial distribution},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MFRNSIBE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.15906}
}

read the original abstract

We examine the sensitivity at the origin of the distributional robust optimization problem in the context of a model generated by a mean field stochastic differential equation. We adapt the finite dimensional argument developed by Bartl, Drapeau, Obloj \& Wiesel to our framework involving the infinite dimensional gradient of the solution of the mean field SDE with respect to its initial data. We revisit the derivation of this gradient process as previously introduced by Buckdahn, Li \& Peng, and we complement the existing properties so as to satisfy the requirement of our main result.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Optimal Control of Heterogeneous Mean-Field Stochastic Differential Equations with Common Noise and Applications
math.OC 2025-11 reject novelty 8.0 of 10

An LQ control framework for heterogeneous mean-field SDEs with common noise, solved through a triangular system of Hilbert-space Riccati BSDEs.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Sensitiv ity analysis of Wasserstein distributionally robust opti- mization problems

Bartl, D., Drapeau, S., Obłój, J., & Wiesel, J., "Sensitiv ity analysis of Wasserstein distributionally robust opti- mization problems". Proceedings of the Royal Society A . 477.2256, p. 20210176 (2021)

work page 2021
[2]

Sensitivity of multiperiod optim ization problems with respect to the adapted Wasserstein distance

Bartl, D. & Wiesel, J., "Sensitivity of multiperiod optim ization problems with respect to the adapted Wasserstein distance". SIAM Journal on Financial Mathematics . 14.2, 704-720 (2023)

work page 2023
[3]

Nonparametric adaptive robust control under model uncertainty

Bayraktar, E. & Chen, T., "Nonparametric adaptive robust control under model uncertainty". SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization . 61.5, 2737-2760 (2023)

work page 2023
[4]

Robust Wasserstein p roﬁle inference and applications to machine learning

Blanchet, J., Kang, Y. & Murthy, K., "Robust Wasserstein p roﬁle inference and applications to machine learning". Journal of Applied Probability . 56.3, 830-857 (2019)

work page 2019
[5]

Quantifying distributional m odel risk via optimal transport

Blanchet, J. & Murthy, K., "Quantifying distributional m odel risk via optimal transport". Mathematics of Oper- ations Research. 44.2, 565-600 (2019)

work page 2019
[6]

Distributionally ro bust mean-variance portfolio selection with Wasserstein distances

Blanchet, J., Chen, L. & Zhou, X. Y., "Distributionally ro bust mean-variance portfolio selection with Wasserstein distances". Management Science . 68.9, 6382-6410 (2022). SENSITIVITY OF FUNCTIONALS OF MCKEAN-VLASOV SDES 17

work page 2022
[7]

Statistical limit theorems i n distributionally robust optimization

Blanchet, J. & Shapiro, A., "Statistical limit theorems i n distributionally robust optimization". 2023 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC) . pp. 31-45 (2023)

work page 2023
[8]

Distributional ly robust optimization and robust statistics

Blanchet, J., Li, J., Lin, S. & Zhang, X., "Distributional ly robust optimization and robust statistics". ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2401.14655 (2024)

arXiv 2024

Show all 31 references

[9]

Mean-ﬁeld sto chastic diﬀerential equations and associated PDEs

Buckdahn, R., Li, J., Peng, S. & Rainer, C., "Mean-ﬁeld sto chastic diﬀerential equations and associated PDEs". Ann. Probab. 45.2, 824 - 878 (2017)

2017
[10]

Doubly-stochastic inte rpretation for nonlocal semi-linear backward stochastic partial diﬀerential equations

Buckdahn, R., Li, J. & Xing, C., "Doubly-stochastic inte rpretation for nonlocal semi-linear backward stochastic partial diﬀerential equations". Journal of Diﬀerential Equations . 375 pp. 1-81 (2023)

2023
[11]

Probabilistic theory of mean ﬁeld games with applications I-II

Carmona, R. & Delarue, F., "Probabilistic theory of mean ﬁeld games with applications I-II" (Springer, 2018)

2018
[12]

Mean ﬁeld games an d systemic risk

Carmona, R., Fouque, J.P. & Sun, L.H., "Mean ﬁeld games an d systemic risk". Commun. Math. Sci. textbf13.4 pp. 911–933 (2015)

2015
[13]

A probabilis tic approach to classical solutions of the master equation for large population equilibria

Chassagneux, J., Crisan, D. & Delarue, F., "A probabilis tic approach to classical solutions of the master equation for large population equilibria". Vol. 280. 1379. American Mathematical Society (2022)

2022
[14]

Linear-quadrati c optimal control for non-exchangeable mean-ﬁeld SDEs and applications to systemic risk

De Crescenzo, A., de Feo, F., Pham, H., "Linear-quadrati c optimal control for non-exchangeable mean-ﬁeld SDEs and applications to systemic risk", arXiv:2503.03318 (202 5)
[15]

Mean ﬁeld game of mutual holdin g

Djete, M. F., & Touzi, N., "Mean ﬁeld game of mutual holdin g" The Annals of Applied Probability, 34(6), 4999-5031 (2024)

2024
[16]

Data-driven distributionall y robust optimization using the Wasserstein metric: Performance guarantees and tractable reformulations

Esfahani, P. M & Kuhn, D., "Data-driven distributionall y robust optimization using the Wasserstein metric: Performance guarantees and tractable reformulations". Mathematical Programming . 171.1, 115-166 (2018)

2018
[17]

Distributionally robust optimization wi th noisy data for discrete uncertainties using total variat ion distance

Farokhi, F., "Distributionally robust optimization wi th noisy data for discrete uncertainties using total variat ion distance". IEEE Control Systems Letters . 7 pp. 1494-1499 (2023)

2023
[18]

Wasserstein pert urbations of Markovian transition semigroups

Fuhrmann, S., Kupper, M. & Nendel, M., "Wasserstein pert urbations of Markovian transition semigroups". An- nales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré, Probabilités Et Statis tiques. 59 (May 2023)

2023
[19]

Mean-ﬁeld SDEs with jumps and nonlocal i ntegral-PDEs

Hao, T. & Li, J., "Mean-ﬁeld SDEs with jumps and nonlocal i ntegral-PDEs". Nonlinear Diﬀerential Equations and Applications NoDEA . 23 pp. 1-51 (2016)

2016
[20]

Nash equilibr ia for large-population linear stochastic systems of weakly coupled agents

Huang, M., Malhamé, R. P., & Caines, P. E., "Nash equilibr ia for large-population linear stochastic systems of weakly coupled agents". Analysis, control and optimization of complex dynamic syst ems (pp. 215-252). Boston, MA: Springer US, (2005)

2005
[21]

Sensitivity of causal distributi onally robust optimization

Jiang, Y. & Obloj, J., "Sensitivity of causal distributi onally robust optimization". ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2408.17109. (2024)

2024 arXiv
[22]

Robust sensitivity analysis for stochastic sy stems

Lam, H., "Robust sensitivity analysis for stochastic sy stems". Mathematics of Operations Research . 41.4, 1248- 1275 (2016)

2016
[23]

First-order c onditions for optimization in the Wasserstein space

Lanzetti, N., Bolognani, S. & Dörﬂer, F., "First-order c onditions for optimization in the Wasserstein space". ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2209.12197 (2022)

2022 arXiv
[24]

& Lions, P.L

Lasry, J.M. & Lions, P.L. Mean ﬁeld games. Japanese journal of mathematics , 2(1), pp.229-260, (2007)

2007
[25]

& Shkolnikov, M

Nadtochiy, S. & Shkolnikov, M. Mean ﬁeld systems on netwo rks, with singular interaction through hitting times. The Annals of Probability , 48(3), 1520-1556 (2020)

2020
[26]

Robust SGLD algorit hm for solving non-convex distributionally robust optimisation problems

Neufeld, A., En, M. N. C. & Zhang, Y., "Robust SGLD algorit hm for solving non-convex distributionally robust optimisation problems". ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2403.09532 (2024)

2024 arXiv
[27]

A parametric approach to the estimation of convex risk functionals based on Wasserstein distance

Nendel, M. & Sgarabottolo, A., "A parametric approach to the estimation of convex risk functionals based on Wasserstein distance". ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2210.14340 (2022)

2022 arXiv
[28]

First order Martingale mode l risk and semi-static hedging

Sauldubois, N. & Touzi, N., "First order Martingale mode l risk and semi-static hedging". ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2410.06906 (2024)

2024
[29]

Optimal transport: old and new

Villani, C., "Optimal transport: old and new". Vol. 338. (Springer, 2009)

2009
[30]

On linear optimizatio n over Wasserstein balls

Yue, M., Kuhn, D. & Wiesemann, W., "On linear optimizatio n over Wasserstein balls". Mathematical Program- ming. 195, 1107-1122 (2022)

2022
[31]

Nonlinear Functional Analysis and Its App lications

Zeidler, E., "Nonlinear Functional Analysis and Its App lications". Fixed-point Theorems. pp. 897 (1986). 18 DE FEO, FEDERICO, GOZZI, AND TOUZI Filippo de Feo, Depar tment of Economics and Finance, Luiss G uido Carli University, Rome (Italy) and Institut für Ma thema tik, Tech...

1986

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Sensitiv ity analysis of Wasserstein distributionally robust opti- mization problems

Bartl, D., Drapeau, S., Obłój, J., & Wiesel, J., "Sensitiv ity analysis of Wasserstein distributionally robust opti- mization problems". Proceedings of the Royal Society A . 477.2256, p. 20210176 (2021)

work page 2021

[2] [2]

Sensitivity of multiperiod optim ization problems with respect to the adapted Wasserstein distance

Bartl, D. & Wiesel, J., "Sensitivity of multiperiod optim ization problems with respect to the adapted Wasserstein distance". SIAM Journal on Financial Mathematics . 14.2, 704-720 (2023)

work page 2023

[3] [3]

Nonparametric adaptive robust control under model uncertainty

Bayraktar, E. & Chen, T., "Nonparametric adaptive robust control under model uncertainty". SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization . 61.5, 2737-2760 (2023)

work page 2023

[4] [4]

Robust Wasserstein p roﬁle inference and applications to machine learning

Blanchet, J., Kang, Y. & Murthy, K., "Robust Wasserstein p roﬁle inference and applications to machine learning". Journal of Applied Probability . 56.3, 830-857 (2019)

work page 2019

[5] [5]

Quantifying distributional m odel risk via optimal transport

Blanchet, J. & Murthy, K., "Quantifying distributional m odel risk via optimal transport". Mathematics of Oper- ations Research. 44.2, 565-600 (2019)

work page 2019

[6] [6]

Distributionally ro bust mean-variance portfolio selection with Wasserstein distances

Blanchet, J., Chen, L. & Zhou, X. Y., "Distributionally ro bust mean-variance portfolio selection with Wasserstein distances". Management Science . 68.9, 6382-6410 (2022). SENSITIVITY OF FUNCTIONALS OF MCKEAN-VLASOV SDES 17

work page 2022

[7] [7]

Statistical limit theorems i n distributionally robust optimization

Blanchet, J. & Shapiro, A., "Statistical limit theorems i n distributionally robust optimization". 2023 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC) . pp. 31-45 (2023)

work page 2023

[8] [8]

Distributional ly robust optimization and robust statistics

Blanchet, J., Li, J., Lin, S. & Zhang, X., "Distributional ly robust optimization and robust statistics". ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2401.14655 (2024)

arXiv 2024