MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216731464 · doi:10.23952/asvao.6.2024.2.01

Forward-backward splitting with deviations for monotone inclusions

2024· article· en· W3216731464 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hamed Sadeghi, Sebastian Banert, Pontus Giselsson

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Set-Valued Analysis and Optimization · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Variational Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKnut och Alice Wallenbergs Stiftelse
KeywordsMonotone polygonMathematicsConvergence (economics)Norm (philosophy)Bounded functionMonotonic functionApplied mathematicsAlgorithmRate of convergenceMetric (unit)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose and study a weakly convergent variant of the forward-backward algorithm for solving structured monotone inclusion problems.Our algorithm features a per-iteration deviation vector, providing additional degrees of freedom.The only requirement on the deviation vector to guarantee convergence is that its norm is bounded by a quantity that can be computed online.This approach offers great flexibility and paves the way for the design of new forward-backward-based algorithms, while still retaining global convergence guarantees.These guarantees include linear convergence under a metric subregularity assumption.Choosing suitable monotone operators enables the incorporation of deviations into other algorithms, such as the Chambolle-Pock method and Krasnosel'skiȋ-Mann iterations.We propose a novel inertial primal-dual algorithm by selecting the deviations along a momentum direction and deciding their size by using the norm condition.Numerical experiments validate our convergence claims and demonstrate that even this simple choice of a deviation vector can enhance the performance compared to, for instance, the standard Chambolle-Pock algorithm.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Set-Valued Analysis and OptimizationSame topicOptimization and Variational AnalysisFrench-language works237,207