Push-Sum Distributed Dual Averaging for convex optimization
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
Recently there has been a significant amount of research on developing consensus based algorithms for distributed optimization motivated by applications that vary from large scale machine learning to wireless sensor networks. This work describes and proves convergence of a new algorithm called Push-Sum Distributed Dual Averaging which combines a recent optimization algorithm [1] with a push-sum consensus protocol [2]. As we discuss, the use of push-sum has significant advantages. Restricting to doubly stochastic consensus protocols is not required and convergence to the true average consensus is guaranteed without knowing the stationary distribution of the update matrix in advance. Furthermore, the communication semantics of just summing the incoming information make this algorithm truly asynchronous and allow a clean analysis when varying intercommunication intervals and communication delays are modelled. We include experiments in simulation and on a small cluster to complement the theoretical analysis.
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