MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164642931 · doi:10.1109/tac.2013.2278132

Distributed Continuous-Time Convex Optimization on Weight-Balanced Digraphs

2014· article· en· W2164642931 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigraphLipschitz continuityDirected graphMathematicsConvex optimizationConvex functionStrongly connected componentRegular polygonMathematical optimizationDiscrete mathematicsComputer scienceCombinatoricsPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This technical note studies the continuous-time distributed optimization of a sum of convex functions over directed graphs. Contrary to what is known in the consensus literature, where the same dynamics works for both undirected and directed scenarios, we show that the consensus-based dynamics that solves the continuous-time distributed optimization problem for undirected graphs fails to converge when transcribed to the directed setting. This study sets the basis for the design of an alternative distributed dynamics which we show is guaranteed to converge, on any strongly connected weight-balanced digraph, to the set of minimizers of a sum of convex differentiable functions with globally Lipschitz gradients. Our technical approach combines notions of invariance and cocoercivity with the positive definiteness properties of graph matrices to establish the results.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.198 · 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