Differential stability of convex optimization problems under inclusion constraints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motivated by the recent work of Mordukhovich et al. [Subgradients of marginal functions in parametric mathematical programming. Math. Program. Ser. B. 2009;116:369–396] on the optimal value function in parametric programming under inclusion constraints, this paper presents some new results on differential stability of convex optimization problems under inclusion constraints and functional constraints in Hausdorff locally convex topological vector spaces. By using the Moreau–Rockafellar theorem and appropriate regularity conditions, we obtain formulas for computing the subdifferential and the singular subdifferential of the optimal value function. By virtue of the convexity, several assumptions used in the above paper by Mordukhovich et al., like the nonemptyness of the Fréchet upper subdiffential of the objective function, the existence of a local upper Lipschitzian selection of the solution map, as well as the -inner semicontinuity and the -inner semicompactness of the solution map, are no longer needed. Relationships between our results and the corresponding ones in Aubin’s book [Optima and equilibria. An introduction to nonlinear analysis. 2nd ed. New York (NY): Springer; 1998] are discussed.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".