MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2255188617 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1407.0671

Optimal rates of convergence of matrices with applications

2014· preprint· en· W2255188617 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Heinz H. Bauschke, Yunier Bello-Cruz, T. T. A. Nghia, Hung M. Phan, Xianfu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2014
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMatrix Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsLinear subspaceRate of convergenceEigenvalues and eigenvectorsCharacterization (materials science)Convergence (economics)Projection (relational algebra)Intersection (aeronautics)MathematicsApplied mathematicsCompact convergenceModes of convergence (annotated index)Projection methodNormal convergenceMathematical optimizationComputer scienceAlgorithmPure mathematicsDykstra's projection algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a systematic study on the linear convergence rates of the powers of (real or complex) matrices. We derive a characterization when the optimal convergence rate is attained. This characterization is given in terms of semi-simpleness of all eigenvalues having the second-largest modulus after 1. We also provide applications of our general results to analyze the optimal convergence rates for several relaxed alternating projection methods and the generalized Douglas-Rachford splitting methods for finding the projection on the intersection of two subspaces. Numerical experiments confirm our convergence 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.159 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicMatrix Theory and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207