MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131237233 · doi:10.1137/080742531

Adaptive First-Order Methods for General Sparse Inverse Covariance Selection

2010· article· en· W2131237233 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Inference
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsEstimation of covariance matricesCovarianceApplied mathematicsGaussianInverseLasso (programming language)Covariance matrixConditional independenceAlgorithmMathematical optimizationStatisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.469

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.371 · 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