MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990689883 · doi:10.1007/s11081-019-09476-9

Robust principal component analysis using facial reduction

2019· article· en· W2990689883 on OpenAlexafffund
Shiqian Ma, Fei Wang, Linchuan Wei, Henry Wolkowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueOptimization and Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversity of California, DavisNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKungliga Tekniska Högskolan
KeywordsRobust principal component analysisOutlierSparse PCAPrincipal component analysisComputer scienceNorm (philosophy)HeuristicMathematical optimizationMatrix (chemical analysis)AlgorithmMatrix normReduction (mathematics)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceEigenvalues and eigenvectors

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We introduce a novel approach for robust principal component analysis (RPCA) for a partially observed data matrix. The aim is to recover the data matrix as a sum of a low-rank matrix and a sparse matrix so as to eliminate erratic noise (outliers). This problem is known to be NP-hard in general. A classical approach to solving RPCA is to consider convex relaxations. One such heuristic involves the minimization of the (weighted) sum of a nuclear norm part, that promotes a low-rank component, with an $$\ell _1$$ ℓ 1 norm part, to promote a sparse component. This results in a well-structured convex problem that can be efficiently solved by modern first-order methods. However, first-order methods often yield low accuracy solutions. Moreover, the heuristic of using a norm consisting of a weighted sum of norms may lose some of the advantages that each norm had when used separately. In this paper, we propose a novel nonconvex and nonsmooth reformulation of the original NP-hard RPCA model. The new model adds a redundant semidefinite cone constraint and solves small subproblems using a PALM algorithm. Each subproblem results in an exposing vector for a facial reduction technique that is able to reduce the size significantly. This makes the problem amenable to efficient algorithms in order to obtain high-level accuracy. We include numerical results that confirm the efficacy of our approach.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptimization and EngineeringSame topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207