Killed-Resolvent Residual for Neural Obstacle Solvers
Implementation & benchmark of arXiv:2607.09987 — Reflected Optimal Stopping with a Max-Type Payoff: Measure-Valued Stopping Gains and Killed Resolvent Representation
Source paper: Reflected Optimal Stopping with a Max-Type Payoff: Measure-Valued Stopping Gains and Killed Resolvent Representation arXiv:2607.09987 ⓘ · analyzed Aug 30, 2026
AI-generated research hypothesis, automatically tested. Not peer-reviewed.
Idea description
Train a value network for stopping or intervention decisions using a killed-resolvent identity rather than an unrestricted diffusion residual. Simulating only until the process exits the continuation region makes the learning target local to the relevant decision domain and correctly handles nonsmooth max rewards.
Formulas
Mathematical statement
The paper studies the discounted stopping value V(x)=\sup_{ au}\mathbb{E}_x[e^{-r au}G(X_ au)-\int_0^ au e^{-rs}c(X_s)ds], where r>0 is the discount rate, c is running cost, X is a reflected diffusion, and G is terminal reward. If \mathcal{C} is the continuation region and \Gamma=c+rG-\mathcal{L}G is the stopping gain, the correct representation is V(x)=G(x)-R_r^{\mathcal{C}}\Gamma(x), where the killed resolvent is R_r^{\mathcal{C}}f(x)=\mathbb{E}_x[\int_0^{ au_{\mathcal{C}}}e^{-rt}f(X_t)dt] and au_{\mathcal{C}} is the first exit time from \mathcal{C}. For G(x_1,x_2)=x_1\vee\alpha x_2, \Gamma is measure-valued because its kink contributes \Gamma^\Delta(dx)=-\frac{n^ op a(x)n}{2\sqrt{1+\alpha^2}}\sigma_\Delta(dx), with n=(1,-\alpha). In a neural solver, represent the smooth part of \Gamma with automatic differentiation and the kink part with a narrow Gaussian surface-density estimator.
Implementation notes
(1) Integrate into a neural optimal-stopping, American-option, intervention-control, or RL value solver. The network outputs V_theta(x); define the learned continuation set C_theta={x: V_theta(x)>G(x)+margin}. The key operation is not a global PDE residual, but a trajectory residual accumulated only until the simulated state exits C_theta. (2) Pseudocode: sample initial states x0; simulate reflected Euler steps x_{t+1}=Proj_{R_+^2}(x_t+mu(x_t)dt+sigma(x_t)sqrt(dt)xi_t); while V_theta(x_t)>G(x_t)+m and t<T, accumulate q += exp(-r*t*dt)*Gamma_smooth(x_t)*dt; detect u_t=x_{t1}-alpha*x_{t2}; add kink contribution gamma_delta=-(n^T a(x_t)n)/(2*sqrt(1+alpha^2))*delta_eps(u_t), with delta_eps(u)=exp(-u^2/(2eps^2))/(sqrt(2*pi)*eps); stop when the continuation test fails; fit V_theta(x0) to G(x0)-q, or minimize the squared identity residual V_theta(x0)-G(x0)+q. (3) Compute Gamma_smooth=c+rG_smooth-LG_smooth using a smooth surrogate G_smooth=sqrt((x1-alpha*x2)^2+eps^2)+alpha*x2; compute the singular correction explicitly from the displayed formula. Estimate a and reflection by the simulator, while r, c, alpha, dt, and eps are known. Use a target network or lagged C_theta every 1000 updates to avoid moving-target instability. (4) First experiment: solve a two-dimensional reflected Brownian stopping problem with constant covariance and max payoff, using a four-layer MLP and compare global PINN residual training, Monte Carlo stopping-value regression, and the killed-resolvent residual. Use 10,000 trajectories and a fixed validation grid. Success is lower value error near the diagonal and stopping boundary, reduced variance across random seeds, or the same error with at least 30% fewer simulated time steps because trajectories terminate at the learned boundary.
Verification
This idea has not been verified yet.
Verification happens in two stages: Stage 1 — a mechanism check on a toy system confirms the claimed mathematical phenomenon reproduces; Stage 2 — a benchmark implements the idea on a real (small) neural network task and compares it against a tuned baseline over 8 paired seeds with a permutation test.
Artifacts
Artifacts unavailable.