Identity Domains Projects Experience Arsenal Vision Contact
Arda Noyan Karasoglu
Industrial Engineering · Bilkent University · 2026

Architecting Decisions
Under Uncertainty

Optimization · Statistical Learning · Financial Systems

I design quantitative systems that remain stable when assumptions fail.

View My Projects Get In Touch
MODEL RELIABILITY 0.94 DECISION LATENCY -40%
80% faster reporting cycle 6 model families benchmarked 2 decision domains deployed
01 / Intellectual identity

How I think

Model the Uncertainty

Decisions must survive deviation, not just expectation.

Structure Before Computation

Formalize the decision. Then build the model.

Translate Across Domains

Different vocabularies. Same mathematical backbone.

Identify Uncertainty Structure
Formalize the Decision
Build & Validate the Model
02 / Core domains

Where I operate

I

Data Science &
Machine Learning

Ingest
Clean
Engineer
Model
Evaluate
tidymodelsXGBoostLightGBMLASSOElastic Net
II

Financial Analytics
& Banking

650+Branches monitored
80%Efficiency gain
DailyReporting cadence
SQLPower BIKPI AnalysisIncome Modeling
III

Optimization &
Robust Modeling

Box B-S Spatial
GurobiRobust OptIMRTLP / MIP
02.5 / Decision IQ

How I choose under pressure

Uncertainty

I model volatility first

Before training anything, I define the uncertainty structure so decisions stay valid when inputs drift.

3 uncertainty geometries tested per high-stakes model
Trade-off

I optimize the decision, not the metric

I use explicit cost curves and threshold rules to choose operating points, instead of chasing one benchmark score.

0.02 minimum gain rule before model switch
Communication

I make technical choices auditable

Every recommendation is paired with assumptions, limits, and validation evidence so teams can trust the output.

4-part reliability card shipped with each project

Uncertainty is not noise. It is structure waiting to be modeled.

03 / Project showcases

The work, dissected

Live Decision Simulator

Drag risk tolerance and watch the recommended policy update in real time.

45
Robustness Expected Return Decision Latency
78%Robustness Score
9.4%Expected Return
48 minDecision Latency
Balanced policy selected: maintain robust constraints and allow moderate upside.
IE 477 — Income Prediction for Digital Banking

Industry-Sponsored · Hayat Finans

RMSE 0.336 10-fold cross-validation Top model LightGBM
Capstone 2025

Problem

Estimate applicant income for digital onboarding where classic documentation is unavailable.

Decision output: 1 score used in credit-routing logic.

Constraint

Data is anonymized and noisy, with high-cardinality behavioral features and proxy leakage risks.

Hard rule: 0 direct income variables allowed in training.

Model

Compared linear and tree families with interaction analysis, feature-importance checks, and residual diagnostics.

6 model families evaluated across 10 folds.

Decision

Selected the top-ranked gradient boosting configuration and applied bias correction for TL-scale projections.

Final selection: Top-1 model + 1 smearing calibration layer.

Business Impact

Built a deployable decision system that keeps interpretability while improving prediction quality in onboarding flows.

Final error: RMSE 0.336 on back-transformed income scale.
Stack
RtidymodelsXGBoostLightGBMRFLASSOElastic NetQuarto
income prediction dashboard
AVG PREDICTION ERROR 0.336 BEST MODEL LightGBM CV SETUP 10-Fold

From masked behavioral data to validated model selection and calibrated income estimates.

Before
Heuristic segmentation with unstable prediction ranking across cohorts.
After
Cross-validated and calibrated decision score with transparent model selection logic.
Recharts
Model Performance Comparison
Lower is better. Ensemble methods outperform linear baselines across all CV folds.
ggplot2
Feature Importance (Best Model)
Top 3 features highlighted. Permutation importance from XGBoost.

Designed a decision system, not only a predictor: model choice, calibration, and governance were integrated together.

Method Reliability Card
Data Scope

Masked applicant + behavioral attributes with 1 merged contextual rent signal.

Assumptions

Log-income transformation and engineered interactions improve linear separability.

Limits

0 direct salary fields used; external validation is still required for production drift.

Validation

10-fold CV, test-set check, residual diagnostics, and smearing correction.

IE 490 — Robust Optimization in IMRT Planning

Undergraduate Research · Bilkent

3 uncertainty sets Gamma stress tested 100% feasibility goal
Research 2025

Problem

Generate radiotherapy plans that remain clinically valid when biological parameters shift from nominal assumptions.

Target: 1 robust treatment plan per case.

Constraint

Tumor coverage and organ-at-risk thresholds must hold even under adversarial uncertainty realizations.

Tolerance: 0 worst-case feasibility violations allowed.

Model

Formulated robust counterparts with geometric uncertainty sets and compared conservatism profiles.

3 set families across 6 gamma levels.

Decision

Selected the operating point at the knee of the conservatism curve to balance reliability and plan quality.

Deployment point: Gamma = 2 (knee region).

Business Impact

Produced robust plans with controlled trade-off against objective value while preserving clinical safety.

Outcome: 100% feasibility with +8.2% objective shift.
Stack
PythonGurobiNumPyMatplotlib
robust planning workspace
ROBUST FEASIBILITY 100% OBJECTIVE SHIFT +8.2%

Visual comparison of uncertainty geometries and robustness cost under clinical safety constraints.

Before
Constraint hit
Nominal planning exposes edge-case violation risk under parameter drift.
After
Robust feasible core
Robust counterpart protects feasibility while keeping objective degradation bounded.
DVH Overlay
Robust vs. Nominal DVH
Robust plan avoids constraint violation under worst-case realization.
Tradeoff Curve
Conservatism Tradeoff
Significant robustness at modest cost. Flat region = diminishing penalty.

Translated mathematical rigor into a clinical decision policy where safety is a hard constraint, not an afterthought.

Method Reliability Card
Data Scope

Voxel-level planning outputs evaluated under geometric uncertainty perturbations.

Assumptions

Uncertainty can be represented by Box, Budgeted, and Spatial sets.

Limits

Higher conservatism increases objective values; trade-off must be clinically accepted.

Validation

DVH overlays and 6-point gamma trade-off stress test.

IE 399 — Automation of Branch Financial Reporting through Power BI

DenizBank HQ · Branch Financial Performance & Reporting

100→20 minutes ~80% faster cycle 650+ branches
Internship 2025

Problem

Daily branch performance reporting relied on repetitive Excel refresh operations and manual formatting.

Operational scope: 650+ branches across Türkiye.

Constraint

Manual exports and pivot refreshes introduced delay and inconsistency before management review.

Cycle burden: 90–120 min/day manual preparation.

Model

Mapped the process as an IE time-study and decomposed reporting tasks into refresh, validation, and delivery stages.

Bottleneck share: manual refresh consumed roughly 70% of total time.

Decision

Built a SQL-connected Power BI dashboard with scheduled refresh and standardized KPI definitions.

Delivery artifact: 1 dynamic dashboard replacing static sheets.

Business Impact

Reduced reporting latency and improved consistency for branch-level decisions in daily management routines.

Preparation time dropped from 100 to 20 minutes (~80% gain).
Stack
Power BISQLExcelKPI DesignProcess Analysis
branch reporting control panel
LEGACY CYCLE 100 min AUTOMATED 20 min EFFICIENCY +80%

Operational reporting transformed into a live monitoring surface for leadership decisions.

Before
Manual extracts, pivot refreshes, and repeated formatting every morning.
After
Scheduled refresh with consistent KPI layer and instant branch/regional filtering.

Converted reporting from a manual routine into a decision infrastructure with measurable time savings.

Method Reliability Card
Data Scope

Daily deposits, loans, margins, income-expense, and branch profitability signals.

Assumptions

KPI definitions remain standardized across branches and reporting periods.

Limits

Bank confidentiality required anonymized screenshots and no external data export.

Validation

Parallel checks against legacy Excel process before full operational handover.

GE 420 — Sustainability Strategy & ESG Analysis of DenizBank

Applied Sustainable Business Development · Team Project

5 SMART goals 20/80 ESG indicator focus 2026–2028 execution horizon
Strategy 2025

Problem

Translate sustainability ambitions into operational targets that can be managed like business KPIs.

Output: 1 integrated ESG strategy roadmap.

Constraint

Reporting burden and fragmented indicators create execution noise across departments.

Pareto rule: top 20% indicators drive roughly 80% value.

Model

Built a structured framework using SWOT, SMART goals, benchmark practices, and change-management mapping.

5 SMART goals translated into measurable KPIs.

Decision

Prioritized energy efficiency, focused ESG data architecture, training, and circular card transition.

Execution window: 2026–2028 with phased departmental rollout.

Business Impact

Defined a bank-ready sustainability operating model with explicit milestones and accountability channels.

Key targets: 20% branch energy cut, 10h training/year, 100% new-card transition.
Stack
ESG AnalyticsSWOTSMART PlanningBenchmarkingKPI DesignChange Management
esg roadmap cockpit
ENERGY GOAL -20% ESG FOCUS 20/80 CARD SHIFT 100%

Strategy translated into measurable ESG execution metrics with time-bounded milestones.

Before
Fragmented sustainability actions with low operational linkage to decision systems.
After
Phased roadmap with KPI ownership, benchmark alignment, and measurable deadlines.

Reframed sustainability from narrative reporting into a target-driven operating system for banking execution.

Method Reliability Card
Data Scope

Integrated annual report evidence, interview findings, and benchmark company practices.

Assumptions

Regulatory direction and stakeholder pressure continue to increase ESG reporting demand.

Limits

Not all ESG indicators have equal signal quality; prioritization is mandatory.

Validation

SMART goals mapped to KPI table and cross-checked against external best practices.

Technical Appendix
IE 477 / Income Prediction Mechanics
Target transformation and back-correction were used for stable estimation under skewed income distributions.
y = log(income + 1), RMSE = sqrt(mean((y_true - y_pred)^2))
Model selection combined cross-validation ranking, residual diagnostics, and post-hoc calibration.
IE 490 / Robust Optimization Core
Robust counterpart formulation was solved under multiple uncertainty-set geometries, then stress-tested over gamma values.
min f(x) subject to g(x, u) ≤ 0 for all u ∈ U
The deployment point was chosen at the conservatism knee instead of absolute minimum nominal objective.
IE 399 / Reporting Process Equation
Time-study decomposition isolated manual refresh load from validation and publishing stages.
T_total = T_refresh + T_validation + T_reporting
Measured transition: 100 minutes → 20 minutes after SQL-linked Power BI automation.
GE 420 / KPI Prioritization Logic
Strategy execution used Pareto filtering to reduce ESG data noise and focus on decision-relevant indicators.
Priority set ≈ top 20% indicators driving ≈ 80% compliance/risk effect
SMART targets were tied to dated milestones (2026–2028) and functional accountability.
04 / Professional experience

Value created

Jul – Aug 2025
DenizBank
Finance & Data Analysis Intern · Branch Performance
650+
Branches Covered
80%
Prep Time Reduced

SQL data extraction. Automated Excel workflows. Daily and monthly KPI reporting for interest rates, income-expense, and volume.

Jul – Aug 2024
Kivanc Energy
Project Management Intern

Solar installation design via SketchUp and PVCase. Performance simulation with PVsyst.

Jun – Jul 2024
Kivanc Energy
Production & Planning Intern

Production tracking via SAP and Logo Tiger 3. Data analysis and visual reporting.

May – Jun 2022
QNB Finansbank
Finance Intern

Financial analysis, reporting, account management.

05 / Technical arsenal

By intelligence layer

Data layer
PythonRSQLpandastidyverseNumPy
Modeling layer
tidymodelsXGBoostLightGBMglmnetGurobiMatplotlibggplot2
Business & analysis
Power BIAdvanced ExcelSAPMS ProjectJira
Energy & engineering
PVsystPVCaseSketchUpGoogle Earth ProLaTeX
Competency Profile
Technical Depth Profile
Asymmetric by design. Strongest at optimization and ML. Developing in visualization and data engineering.
06 / Research interests

Intellectual directions

Deep Uncertainty ML as Infrastructure Quant Finance & Risk Cross-Domain Fluency

Optimization Under Deep Uncertainty

Distributionally robust approaches, adaptive optimization. Applications in financial risk, supply chains, healthcare.

ML as Decision Infrastructure

How does the prediction change the decision? What happens when it's wrong? ML within institutional systems.

Quantitative Finance & Risk

Financial systems as optimization under asymmetric loss. Portfolio construction, credit risk, risk architecture.

Cross-Domain Structural Fluency

Healthcare planning and portfolio allocation share mathematical DNA. Same structure, different vocabulary.

07 / Credentials

Certifications & languages

Certifications
Fundamentals of Quantitative Modeling — UPenn
Corporate Sustainability — Bocconi
Introduction to Data Analytics — IBM
The Product Owner Profession — SkillUp EdTech
Languages
Turkish
Native
English
Advanced
German
Working proficiency
08 / Future direction

What I'm building toward

I am building toward environments where mathematical precision meets institutional consequence. Advanced study in operations research or financial engineering is the next structural step.

Formulate well.
Model precisely.
Decide responsibly.