MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1534354577 · doi:10.1137/s1052623402419789

A Globally Convergent Linearly Constrained Lagrangian Method for Nonlinear Optimization

2005· article· en· W1534354577 on OpenAlexaff
Michael P. Friedlander, Michael A. Saunders

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Optimization · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMINOSAugmented Lagrangian methodMathematicsMathematical optimizationRobustness (evolution)Nonlinear systemNonlinear programmingLagrangianConstrained optimizationMATLABConstrained optimization problemOptimization problemApplied mathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For optimization problems with nonlinear constraints, linearly constrained Lagrangian (LCL) methods solve a sequence of subproblems of the form "minimize an augmented Lagrangian function subject to linearized constraints." Such methods converge rapidly near a solution but may not be reliable from arbitrary starting points. Nevertheless, the well-known software package MINOS has proved effective on many large problems. Its success motivates us to derive a related LCL algorithm that possesses three important properties: it is globally convergent, the subproblem constraints are always feasible, and the subproblems may be solved inexactly. The new algorithm has been implemented in MATLAB, with an option to use either MINOS or SNOPT (Fortran codes) to solve the linearly constrained subproblems. Only first derivatives are required. We present numerical results on a subset of the COPS, HS, and CUTE test problems, which include many large examples. The results demonstrate the robustness and efficiency of the stabilized LCL procedure.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations49
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIAM Journal on OptimizationSame topicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207