Sparse Recovery via Partial Regularization: Models, Theory and Algorithms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of sparse recovery, it is known that most of existing regularizers such as $\ell_1$ suffer from some bias incurred by some leading entries (in magnitude) of the associated vector. To neutralize this bias, we propose a class of models with partial regularizers for recovering a sparse solution of a linear system. We show that every local minimizer of these models is sufficiently sparse or the magnitude of all its nonzero entries is above a uniform constant depending only on the data of the linear system. Moreover, for a class of partial regularizers, any global minimizer of these models is a sparsest solution to the linear system. We also establish some sufficient conditions for local or global recovery of the sparsest solution to the linear system, among which one of the conditions is weaker than the best known restricted isometry property (RIP) condition for sparse recovery by $\ell_1$. In addition, a first-order feasible augmented Lagrangian (FAL) method is proposed for solving these models, in which each subproblem is solved by a nonmonotone proximal gradient (NPG) method. Despite the complication of the partial regularizers, we show that each proximal subproblem in NPG can be solved as a certain number of one-dimensional optimization problems, which usually have a closed-form solution. We also show that any accumulation point of the sequence generated by FAL is a first-order stationary point of the models. Numerical results on compressed sensing and sparse logistic regression demonstrate that the proposed models substantially outperform the widely used ones in the literature in terms of solution quality.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".