MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252738740 · doi:10.23952/jano.3.2021.1.10

On global optimality conditions for D.C. minimization problems with D.C. constraints

2021· article· en· W4252738740 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied and Numerical Optimization · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Variational Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinificationMathematical optimizationComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper addresses the nonconvex nonsmooth optimization problem with the cost function, and equality and inequality constraints given by d.c. functions, i.e. represented as a difference of convex functions. The original problem is reduced to a problem without constraints with the help of the exact penalization theory. After that, the penalized problem is represented as a d.c. minimization problem without constraints, for which the new mathematical tools under the form of global optimality conditions (GOCs) are developed. The GOCs reduce the nonconvex problem in question to a family of convex (linearized with respect to the basic nonconvexities) problems. In addition, the GOCs are related to some nonsmooth form of the KKT-theorem for the original problem. Besides, the GOCs possess the constructive (algorithmic) property, which, when the GOCs are broken down, implies the producing of a feasible point that is better (in the original problem) than the one in question. The effectiveness of the GOCs is demonstrated by examples.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.234 · 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