A continuous-time decentralized optimization scheme with positivity constraints
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we introduce a continuous-time version of a recently proposed decentralized multi-agent optimization scheme. In this scheme, a number of networked agents cooperate in locating the optimum of the sum of their individual objective functions. Each agent has access only to its own objective function and its neighbors' estimates of the collective optimum. Under mild assumptions, we derive explicit expressions for a lower bound on the algorithm's convergence rate and an upper bound on the agents' ultimate estimation error, in terms of relevant problem parameters. We build on the analytic techniques we previously introduced, in which we treat the evolution of the mean and deviation of agents' estimates as two coupled dynamic subsystems, and provide a Lyapunov argument for the practical asymptotic stability of their interconnection. More generally, this approach turns out to be useful in deriving sharper convergence results under weaker assumptions in the continuous-time case, as well as in providing an elegant way to account for the effects of positive projections that might need to be employed by each agent in some applications. Finally, we propose an application of this scheme to the design of fully decentralized dual resource allocation algorithms.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it