MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963881376 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1809.00452

Structured Quasi-Newton Methods for Optimization with Orthogonality Constraints

2018· preprint· en· W2963881376 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jiang Hu, Bo Jiang, Lin Lin, Zaiwen Wen, Ya-xiang Yuan

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPeking UniversityGovernment of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaCentre de Recherches MathématiquesState Key Laboratory of Scientific and Engineering ComputingU.S. Department of EnergyChinese Academy of SciencesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsHessian matrixOrthogonalityEuclidean geometryEuclidean distance matrixHessian equationEigenvalues and eigenvectorsQuasi-Newton methodMathematical optimizationEuclidean spaceConvergence (economics)MathematicsApplied mathematicsNewton's methodFunction (biology)Matrix (chemical analysis)Euclidean distanceComputer scienceMathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study structured quasi-Newton methods for optimization problems with orthogonality constraints. Note that the Riemannian Hessian of the objective function requires both the Euclidean Hessian and the Euclidean gradient. In particular, we are interested in applications that the Euclidean Hessian itself consists of a computational cheap part and a significantly expensive part. Our basic idea is to keep these parts of lower computational costs but substitute those parts of higher computational costs by the limited-memory quasi-Newton update. More specically, the part related to Euclidean gradient and the cheaper parts in the Euclidean Hessian are preserved. The initial quasi-Newton matrix is further constructed from a limited-memory Nyström approximation to the expensive part. Consequently, our subproblems approximate the original objective function in the Euclidean space and preserve the orthogonality constraints without performing the so-called vector transports. When the subproblems are solved to sufficient accuracy, both global and local q-superlinear convergence can be established under mild conditions. Preliminary numerical experiments on the linear eigenvalue problem and the electronic structure calculation show the effectiveness of our method compared with the state-of-art algorithms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.177
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207