Adaptive First-Order Methods for General Sparse Inverse Covariance Selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we consider estimating sparse inverse covariance of a Gaussian graphical model whose conditional independence is assumed to be partially known. Similarly as in [A. d'Aspremont, O. Banerjee, and L. El Ghaoui, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 30 (2008), pp. 56–66; M. Yuan and Y. Lin, Biometrika, 94 (2007), pp. 19–35], we formulate it as an $l_1$-norm penalized maximum likelihood estimation problem. Further, we propose an algorithm framework, and develop two first-order methods, that is, the adaptive spectral projected gradient (ASPG) method and the adaptive Nesterov's smooth (ANS) method, for solving this estimation problem. Finally, we compare the performance of these two methods with glasso [J. Friedman, T. Hastie, and R. Tibshirani, Biostatistics, 9 (2008), pp. 432–441; J. Friedman, T. Hastie, and R. Tibshirani, Glasso: Graphical Lasso for R, Software package, Department of Statistics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 2007] on a set of randomly generated instances. Our computational results demonstrate that our methods are capable of solving problems of size at least a thousand and number of constraints of nearly a half million within a reasonable amount of time, and moreover, that the ASPG method generally outperforms the ANS method and glasso.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".