1. Vapnik V,The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory, Springer Science & Business Media, New York, 2013.

   MATH  Google Scholar 

2. Calafiore G and Campi M C, Uncertain convex programs: Randomized solutions and confidence levels,Mathematical Programming, 2005,102(1): 25–46.

   Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

3. Calafiore G C and Campi M C, The scenario approach to robust control design,IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 2006,51(5): 742–753.

   Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

4. Campi M and Garatti S, The exact feasibility of randomized solutions of uncertain convex programs,SIAM Journal on Optimization, 2008,19(3): 1211–1230.

   Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

5. Campi M C and Garatti S, A sampling-and-discarding approach to chance-constrained optimization: Feasibility and optimality,Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 2011,148(2): 257–280.

   Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

6. Ramponi F A, Consistency of the scenario approach,SIAM Journal on Optimization, 2018,28(1): 135–162.

   Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

7. Garatti S, Campi M, and Carè A, On a class of interval predictor models with universal reliability,Automatica, 2019,110: 108542.

   Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

8. Ramponi F A and Campi M C, Expected shortfall: Heuristics and certificates,European Journal of Operational Research, 2018,267(3): 1003–1013.

   Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

9. Campi M C and Garatti S, Wait-and-judge scenario optimization,Mathematical Programming, 2018,167(1): 155–189.

   Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

10. Carè A, Garatti S, and Campi M C, The wait-and-judge scenario approach applied to antenna array design,Computational Management Science, 2019,16: 481–499.

    Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

11. Carè A, Garatti S, and Campi M C, Scenario min-max optimization and the risk of empirical costs,SIAM Journal on Optimization, 2015,25(4): 2061–2080.

    Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

12. Rockafellar R T and Uryasev S, Optimization of conditional value-at-risk,Journal of Risk, 2000,2: 21–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

13. Ben-Tal A and Teboulle M, An old-new concept of convex risk measures: The optimized certainty equivalent,Mathematical Finance, 2007,17(3): 449–476.

    Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

14. Mansini R, Ogryczak W, and Speranza M G, Conditional value at risk and related linear programming models for portfolio optimization,Annals of Operations Research, 2007,152(1): 227–256.

    Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

15. Artzner P, Delbaen F, Eber J M, and Heath D, Coherent measures of risk,Mathematical Finance, 1999,9(3): 203–228.

    Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

16. Pflug G C, Some remarks on the Value-at-Risk and the Conditional Value-at-Risk,Probabilistic Constrained Optimization: Methodology and Applications (Ed. by Uryasev S P), Boston, MA: Springer US, 2000, 272–281.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

17. Gotoh J Y and Takeda A,CVaR Minimizations in Support Vector Machines, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2016, 233–265.

18. Chan T C, Mahmoudzadeh H, and Purdie T G, A robust-CVaR optimization approach with application to breast cancer therapy,European Journal of Operational Research, 2014,238(3): 876–885.

    Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

19. Nasir H A, Care A, and Weyer E, A randomised approach to flood control using Value-at-Risk, 2015 54th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2015, 3939–3944.

20. Filippi C, Guastaroba G, and Speranza M, Conditional value-at-risk beyond finance: A survey,International Transactions in Operational Research, 2020,27(3): 1277–1319.

    Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

21. Hull J C,Options, Futures and Other Derivatives, Pearson, 2019.

22. David H A and Nagaraja H N,Order Statistics, Wiley, New York, 2003.

    Book  Google Scholar 

23. Carè A, Garatti S, and Campi M C, A coverage theory for least squares,Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 2017,79(5): 1367–1389.

    Article MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references