Gradient Descent Meets Shift-and-Invert Preconditioning for Eigenvector Computation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been a recent surge of interest in developing theoretically faster algorithms for leading eigenvector computation. The key to achieving faster convergence rates therein is to use the classic shift-and-invert preconditioning technique on top of power methods. The underlying problem then can be reduced to a series of linear system subproblems that can leverage fast approximate least squares solvers. Despite the simplicity of the power iterations as the base method, it may suffer from making limited progress towards solutions. In this work, we consider that the shift-and-invert preconditioning is paired with a new base method, namely gradient descent search. By virtue of the flexibility of setting step-sizes in gradient search processes, we expect the shift-and-inverted gradient descent solver can outperform the shift-and-inverted power methods. In particular, we present a novel convergence analysis for this new pairing that achieves a rate at ˜ O ( √ λ1 λ1−λp+1 ) , where λi represents the i -th largest eigenvalue of the given real symmetric matrix and p is the multiplicity of λ1 . Our experimental studies show that the proposed algorithm can be significantly faster than the shift-and-inverted power method in practice.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it