MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963598490 · doi:10.1287/moor.2017.0905

Sparse Recovery via Partial Regularization: Models, Theory, and Algorithms

2018· article· en· W2963598490 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics of Operations Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsRestricted isometry propertyAugmented Lagrangian methodRegularization (linguistics)Compressed sensingMathematical optimizationSequence (biology)Applied mathematicsOptimization problemClass (philosophy)Sparse approximationAlgorithmComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the context of sparse recovery, it is known that most of the existing regularizers such as ℓ 1 suffer from some bias incurred by some leading entries (in magnitude) of the associated vector. To neutralize this bias, we propose a class of models with partial regularizers for recovering a sparse solution of a linear system. We show that every local minimizer of these models is substantially sparse or the magnitude of all of its nonzero entries is above a uniform constant depending only on the data of the linear system. Moreover, for a class of partial regularizers, any global minimizer of these models is a sparsest solution to the linear system. We also establish some sufficient conditions for local or global recovery of the sparsest solution to the linear system, among which one of the conditions is weaker than the best-known restricted isometry property condition for sparse recovery by ℓ 1 . In addition, a first-order augmented Lagrangian (FAL) method is proposed for solving these models, in which each subproblem is solved by a nonmonotone proximal gradient (NPG) method. Despite the complication of the partial regularizers, we show that each proximal subproblem in NPG can be solved as a certain number of one-dimensional optimization problems, which usually have a closed-form solution. We also show that any accumulation point of the sequence generated by FAL is a first-order stationary point of the models. Numerical results on compressed sensing and sparse logistic regression demonstrate that the proposed models substantially outperform the widely used ones in the literature in terms of solution quality.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.258 · 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