Delay-Tolerant Online Convex Optimization: Unified Analysis and Adaptive-Gradient Algorithms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a unified, black-box-style method for developing and analyzing online convex optimization (OCO) algorithms for full-information online learning in delayed-feedback environments. Our new, simplified analysis enables us to substantially improve upon previous work and to solve a number of open problems from the literature. Specifically, we develop and analyze asynchronous AdaGrad-style algorithms from the Follow-the-Regularized-Leader (FTRL) and Mirror-Descent family that, unlike previous works, can handle projections and adapt both to the gradients and the delays, without relying on either strong convexity or smoothness of the objective function, or data sparsity. Our unified framework builds on a natural reduction from delayed-feedback to standard (non-delayed) online learning. This reduction, together with recent unification results for OCO algorithms, allows us to analyze the regret of generic FTRL and Mirror-Descent algorithms in the delayed-feedback setting in a unified manner using standard proof techniques. In addition, the reduction is exact and can be used to obtain both upper and lower bounds on the regret in the delayed-feedback setting.
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 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".