Tight analyses for non-smooth stochastic gradient descent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consider the problem of minimizing functions that are Lipschitz and strongly convex, but not necessarily differentiable. We prove that after $T$ steps of stochastic gradient descent, the error of the final iterate is $O(\log(T)/T)$ with high probability. We also construct a function from this class for which the error of the final iterate of deterministic gradient descent is $\Omega(\log(T)/T)$. This shows that the upper bound is tight and that, in this setting, the last iterate of stochastic gradient descent has the same general error rate (with high probability) as deterministic gradient descent. This resolves both open questions posed by Shamir (2012). An intermediate step of our analysis proves that the suffix averaging method achieves error $O(1/T)$ with high probability, which is optimal (for any first-order optimization method). This improves results of Rakhlin (2012) and Hazan and Kale (2014), both of which achieved error $O(1/T)$, but only in expectation, and achieved a high probability error bound of $O(\log \log(T)/T)$, which is suboptimal. We prove analogous results for functions that are Lipschitz and convex, but not necessarily strongly convex or differentiable. After $T$ steps of stochastic gradient descent, the error of the final iterate is $O(\log(T)/\sqrt{T})$ with high probability, and there exists a function for which the error of the final iterate of deterministic gradient descent is $\Omega(\log(T)/\sqrt{T})$.
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 | 0.027 | 0.131 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".