Optimization conditions and decomposable algorithms for convertible nonconvex optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper defines a convertible nonconvex function (CN function for short) and a weak (strong) uniform (decomposable, exact) CN function, proves the optimization conditions for their global solutions, and proposes algorithms for solving the unconstrained optimization problems with decomposable CN functions.First, to illustrate the fact that some nonconvex functions, nonsmooth or discontinuous, are actually weak uniform CN functions, examples are given.The operational properties of CN functions are proved, including addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and compound operations.Second, optimization conditions of the global optimal solution to the unconstrained optimization with weak uniform CN function are proved.Based on the unconstrained optimization problem with decomposable CN functions, a decomposable algorithm is proposed by its augmented Lagrangian penalty function and its convergence is proved.Numerical results demonstrate that an approximate global optimal solution to unconstrained optimization with CN function may be obtained by the decomposable algorithm.The decomposable algorithm can effectively reduce the scale in solving the unconstrained optimization problem with decomposable CN function.This paper provides a new idea for solving unconstrained nonconvex optimization problems.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".