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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.007
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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