Activating availability constraints in the IP pipeline lowers SHACL conformance to 0.875 without reducing optimization cost, exposing infeasible plans¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2029: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In a 200-case ablation, IP and Wachter-style baselines have nearly identical average cost (24.127 vs. 24.175) with perfect conformance, but IP with availability constraints drops to conformance 0.875 at the same cost. → Ngoc Luyen Le 2026

Evidence¶

Ngoc Luyen Le 2026¶

Ngoc Luyen Le, Marie-Hélène Abel, Bertrand Laforge. (2026). From Student Risk Prediction to SC2R: Semantics-Constrained Counterfactual Recourse for Educational Decision Support. arXiv preprint. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.17618 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2608.17618

q2 · i? · design · r2

Controlled 200-case ablation comparing IP recourse, Wachter-style recourse, and IP with availability constraints (Fig. 5). The article reports that "the conformance rate decreases to0.875without any reduction in optimization cost" when availability constraints are activated.

"The IP solver and the Wachter-style baseline have nearly identical average cost (24.127 vs. 24.175), and both achieve perfect model validity and SHACL conformance under the baseline con- straint configuration. However, when availability constraints are activated in the IP pipeline, the conformance rate decreases to0.875without any reduction in optimization cost."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Integer-programming recourse generates compact, model-valid, SHACL-conformant intervention plans at scale on OULAD — related