MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967097710

Applications of Stochastic Gradient Descent to Nonnegative Matrix Factorization

2019· dissertation· en· W2967097710 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Matthew Slavin

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsNon-negative matrix factorizationStochastic gradient descentNonnegative matrixMathematicsGradient descentMatrix decompositionApplied mathematicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePhysicsSymmetric matrix
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the application of stochastic gradient descent (SGD) to the nonnegative matrix factorization (NMF) problem and the unconstrained low-rank matrix factorization problem. While the literature on the SGD algorithm is rich, the application of this specific algorithm to the field of matrix factorization problems is an unexplored area. We develop a series of results for the unconstrained problem, beginning with an analysis of standard gradient descent with a known zero-loss solution, and culminating with results for SGD in the general case where no zero-loss solution is assumed. We show that, with initialization close to a minimizer, there exist linear rate convergence guarantees. \nWe explore these results further with numerical experiments, and examine how the matrix factorization solutions found by SGD can be used as machine learning classifiers in two specific applications. In the first application, handwritten digit recognition, we show that our approach produces classification performance competitive with existing matrix factorization algorithms. In the second application, document topic classification, we examine how well SGD can recover an unknown words-to-topics matrix when the topics-to-document matrix is generated using the Latent Dirichlet Allocation model. This approach allows us to simulate two regimes for SGD: a fixed-sample regime where a large set of data is iterated over to train the model, and a generated-sample regime where a new data point is generated at each training iteration. In both regimes, we show that SGD can be an effective tool for recovering the hidden words-to-topic matrix. We conclude with some suggestions for further expansion of this work.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207