MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300387569 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1703.06987

Compressed sensing approaches for polynomial approximation of high-dimensional functions

2017· preprint· en· W4300387569 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ben Adcock, Simone Brugiapaglia, Clayton Webster

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Approximation and Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOak Ridge National LaboratoryAlfred P. Sloan FoundationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDivision of Mathematical SciencesAdvanced Research Projects AgencyOffice of ScienceDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyPacific Institute for the Mathematical SciencesBattelleUT-BattelleAdvanced Scientific Computing ResearchU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsCurse of dimensionalityPolynomialTruncation (statistics)Dimension (graph theory)ComputationApplied mathematicsFocus (optics)MathematicsMultivariate statisticsMinificationComputer scienceAlgorithmMathematical optimizationPure mathematicsArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysisStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the use of sparse recovery techniques in the approximation of high-dimensional functions has garnered increasing interest. In this work we present a survey of recent progress in this emerging topic. Our main focus is on the computation of polynomial approximations of high-dimensional functions on $d$-dimensional hypercubes. We show that smooth, multivariate functions possess expansions in orthogonal polynomial bases that are not only approximately sparse, but possess a particular type of structured sparsity defined by so-called lower sets. This structure can be exploited via the use of weighted $\ell^1$ minimization techniques, and, as we demonstrate, doing so leads to sample complexity estimates that are at most logarithmically dependent on the dimension $d$. Hence the curse of dimensionality - the bane of high-dimensional approximation - is mitigated to a significant extent. We also discuss several practical issues, including unknown noise (due to truncation or numerical error), and highlight a number of open problems and challenges.

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)0.008
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.258
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.015 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicMathematical Approximation and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207