MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2618706285 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1705.10299

Robustness to unknown error in sparse regularization

2017· preprint· en· W2618706285 on OpenAlexafffund
Simone Brugiapaglia, Ben Adcock

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersDivision of Mathematical SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPacific Institute for the Mathematical SciencesAlfred P. Sloan Foundation
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Orthonormal basisCompressed sensingBounded functionQuadratic growthMathematicsRegularization (linguistics)QuotientComputer scienceGaussianA priori and a posterioriAlgorithmMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quadratically-constrained basis pursuit has become a popular device in sparse regularization; in particular, in the context of compressed sensing. However, the majority of theoretical error estimates for this regularizer assume an a priori bound on the noise level, which is usually lacking in practice. In this paper, we develop stability and robustness estimates which remove this assumption. First, we introduce an abstract framework and show that robust instance optimality of any decoder in the noise-aware setting implies stability and robustness in the noise-blind setting. This is based on certain sup-inf constants referred to as quotients, strictly related to the quotient property of compressed sensing. We then apply this theory to prove the robustness of quadratically-constrained basis pursuit under unknown error in the cases of random Gaussian matrices and of random matrices with heavy-tailed rows, such as random sampling matrices from bounded orthonormal systems. We illustrate our results in several cases of practical importance, including subsampled Fourier measurements and recovery of sparse polynomial expansions.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.370
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.114 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207