Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adaptive cubic regularization (ARC) methods for unconstrained optimization compute steps from linear systems involving a shifted Hessian in the spirit of the Levenberg-Marquardt and trust-region methods. The standard approach consists in performing an iterative search for the shift akin to solving the secular equation in trust-region methods. Such search requires computing the Cholesky factorization of a tentative shifted Hessian at each iteration, which limits the size of problems that can be reasonably considered. We propose a scalable implementation of ARC named ARCqK in which we solve a set of shifted systems concurrently by way of an appropriate modification of the Lanczos formulation of the conjugate gradient (CG) method. At each iteration of ARCqK to solve a problem with n variables, a range of m << n shift parameters is selected. The computational overhead in CG beyond the Lanczos process is thirteen scalar operations to update five vectors of length m and two n-vector updates for each value of the shift. The CG variant only requires one Hessian-vector product and one dot product per iteration, independently of the number of shift parameters. Solves corresponding to inadequate shift parameters are interrupted early. All shifted systems are solved inexactly. Such modest cost makes our implementation scalable and appropriate for large-scale problems. We provide a new analysis of the inexact ARC method including its worst case evaluation complexity, global and asymptotic convergence. We describe our implementation and provide preliminary numerical observations that confirm that for problems of size at least 100, our implementation of ARCqK is more efficient than a classic Steihaug-Toint trust region method. Finally, we generalize our convergence results to inexact Hessians and nonlinear least-squares problems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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".