A Primal-Dual Regularized Interior-Point Method for Semidefinite Programming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interior-point methods in semidefinite programming SDP require the solution of a sequence of linear systems which are used to derive the search directions. Safeguards are typically required in order to handle rank-deficient Jacobians and free variables. We generalize the primal–dual regularization of Friedlander and Orban [A primal–dual regularized interior-point method for convex quadratic programs, Math. Program. Comput. 4 2012, pp. 71–107] to SDP and show that it is possible to recover an optimal solution of the original primal–dual pair by taking one step of Newton method to a sequence of regularized SDPs at each iteration for both the Nesterov–Todd and dual Helmberg–Kojima–Monteiro HKM directions. Computationally, a sparse factorization may be used on a sparse augmented system instead of the more costly symmetric indefinite factorization. Benefits of our approach include increased robustness and a simpler implementation. Our method does not require the constraints to be linearly independent and does not assume that Slater's condition holds. We report numerical experience on standard problems that illustrate our findings.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".