Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we propose an online learning algorithm, a general randomized sparse Kaczmarz method, for generating sparse approximate solutions to linear systems and present learning theory analysis for its convergence. Under a mild assumption covering the case of noisy random measurements in the sampling process or nonlinear regression function, we show that the algorithm converges in expectation if and only if the step size sequence $\{\eta_t\}_{t\in\mathbb{N}}$ satisfies $\lim_{t\to\infty}\eta_t=0$ and $\sum_{t=1}^{\infty}\eta_t=\infty$. Convergence rates are also obtained and linear convergence is shown to be impossible under the assumption of positive variance of the sampling process. A sufficient condition for almost sure convergence is derived with an additional restriction $\sum_{t=1}^{\infty}\eta_t^2 <\infty$. Our novel analysis is performed by interpreting the randomized sparse Kaczmarz method as a special online mirror descent algorithm with a nondifferentiable mirror map and using the Bregman distance. The sufficient and necessary conditions are derived by establishing a restricted variant of strong convexity for the involved generalization error and using the special structures of the soft-thresholding operator.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".