MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1497401739 · doi:10.1137/130930339

An Iterative Minimization Formulation for Saddle Point Search

2015· article· en· W1497401739 on OpenAlexaff
Weiguo Gao, Jing Leng, Xiang Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMarkov Chains and Monte Carlo Methods
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsSaddle pointMinificationIterative methodRate of convergenceApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationQuadratic equationLocal convergenceManifold (fluid mechanics)SaddleComputer scienceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes and analyzes an iterative minimization formulation for searching index-1 saddle points of an energy function. We give a general and rigorous description of eigenvector-following methodology in this iterative scheme by considering an auxiliary optimization problem at each iteration in which the new objective function is locally defined near the current guess. We prove that this scheme has a quadratic local convergence rate in terms of number of iterations, in comparison to the linear rate of the gentlest ascent dynamics [W. E and X. Zhou, Nonlinearity, 24 (2011), pp. 1831--1842] and many other existing methods. We also propose the generalization of the new methodology for saddle points of higher index and for constrained energy functions on the manifold. Preliminary numerical results on the nature of this iterative minimization formulation are presented.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.124
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations50
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIAM Journal on Numerical AnalysisSame topicMarkov Chains and Monte Carlo MethodsFrench-language works237,207