Penalty and Augmented Lagrangian Methods for Constrained DC Programming
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we consider a class of structured nonsmooth difference-of-convex (DC) constrained DC programs in which the first convex component of the objective and constraints is the sum of a smooth and a nonsmooth function, and their second convex component is the supremum of finitely many convex smooth functions. The existing methods for this problem usually have a weak convergence guarantee or require a feasible initial point. Inspired by the recent work by Pang et al. [Pang J-S, Razaviyayn M, Alvarado A (2017) Computing B-stationary points of nonsmooth DC programs. Math. Oper. Res. 42(1):95–118.], in this paper, we propose two infeasible methods with a strong convergence guarantee for the considered problem. The first one is a penalty method that consists of finding an approximate D-stationary point of a sequence of penalty subproblems. We show that any feasible accumulation point of the solution sequence generated by such a penalty method is a B-stationary point of the problem under a weakest possible assumption that it satisfies a pointwise Slater constraint qualification (PSCQ). The second one is an augmented Lagrangian (AL) method that consists of finding an approximate D-stationary point of a sequence of AL subproblems. Under the same PSCQ condition as for the penalty method, we show that any feasible accumulation point of the solution sequence generated by such an AL method is a B-stationary point of the problem, and moreover, it satisfies a Karush–Kuhn–Tucker type of optimality condition for the problem, together with any accumulation point of the sequence of a set of auxiliary Lagrangian multipliers. We also propose an efficient successive convex approximation method for computing an approximate D-stationary point of the penalty and AL subproblems. Finally, some numerical experiments are conducted to demonstrate the efficiency of our proposed methods.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it