MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963948233 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1809.09354

Accelerated Coordinate Descent with Arbitrary Sampling and Best Rates\n for Minibatches

2018· preprint· W2963948233 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

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2018
Typepreprint
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection Algorithms
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSampling (signal processing)Descent (aeronautics)Coordinate descentMathematicsComputer scienceStatisticsApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationPhysicsComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accelerated coordinate descent is a widely popular optimization algorithm due\nto its efficiency on large-dimensional problems. It achieves state-of-the-art\ncomplexity on an important class of empirical risk minimization problems. In\nthis paper we design and analyze an accelerated coordinate descent (ACD) method\nwhich in each iteration updates a random subset of coordinates according to an\narbitrary but fixed probability law, which is a parameter of the method. If all\ncoordinates are updated in each iteration, our method reduces to the classical\naccelerated gradient descent method AGD of Nesterov. If a single coordinate is\nupdated in each iteration, and we pick probabilities proportional to the square\nroots of the coordinate-wise Lipschitz constants, our method reduces to the\ncurrently fastest coordinate descent method NUACDM of Allen-Zhu, Qu,\nRicht\\'{a}rik and Yuan.\n While mini-batch variants of ACD are more popular and relevant in practice,\nthere is no importance sampling for ACD that outperforms the standard uniform\nmini-batch sampling. Through insights enabled by our general analysis, we\ndesign new importance sampling for mini-batch ACD which significantly\noutperforms previous state-of-the-art minibatch ACD in practice. We prove a\nrate that is at most ${\\cal O}(\\sqrt{\\tau})$ times worse than the rate of\nminibatch ACD with uniform sampling, but can be ${\\cal O}(n/\\tau)$ times\nbetter, where $\\tau$ is the minibatch size. Since in modern supervised learning\ntraining systems it is standard practice to choose $\\tau \\ll n$, and often\n$\\tau={\\cal O}(1)$, our method can lead to dramatic speedups. Lastly, we obtain\nsimilar results for minibatch nonaccelerated CD as well, achieving improvements\non previous best rates.\n

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.090 · 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