<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Recourse on Aayush Bajaj's Augmenting Infrastructure</title><link>https://abaj.ai/tags/recourse/</link><description>Recent content in Recourse on Aayush Bajaj's Augmenting Infrastructure</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><copyright>© 2026 Aayush Bajaj</copyright><lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2026 08:15:51 +1000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://abaj.ai/tags/recourse/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Stochastic</title><link>https://abaj.ai/wiki/ccs/programming/paradigms/stochastic/</link><pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2026 07:43:56 +1000</pubDate><guid>https://abaj.ai/wiki/ccs/programming/paradigms/stochastic/</guid><description>&lt;p>a &lt;a
 href="https://abaj.ai/wiki/ccs/programming/paradigms/linear/"
 
 
>linear program&lt;/a> assumes you know the data. stochastic programming admits that you do not — some coefficients are random — but insists you know their &lt;em>distribution&lt;/em>, and asks for the decision that is best &lt;strong>on average&lt;/strong>.&lt;span class="margin-note" data-note="dantzig again: his 1955 paper founded the field eight years after he invented simplex. beale published the same idea the same year">
 &lt;span class="margin-note-indicator">𐃏&lt;/span>
&lt;/span>

the structural insight that makes this a paradigm rather than a hack: split the decision in two. commit to \(x\) now, before the coin is flipped; after uncertainty resolves, take a corrective &lt;em>recourse&lt;/em> action \(y\) that adapts to whatever happened. the objective charges you for both, weighting the second stage by expectation.&lt;sup id="fnref:1">&lt;a href="#fn:1" class="footnote-ref" role="doc-noteref">1&lt;/a>&lt;/sup>&lt;/p></description></item></channel></rss>