Optimality conditions and constraint qualifications for cardinality constrained optimization problems
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cardinality constrained optimization problem (CCOP) is an optimization problem where the maximum number of nonzero components of any feasible point is bounded. In this paper, by rewriting the cardinality constraint as a constraint requiring that any feasible point must lie in the union of certain subspaces, we consider CCOP as a mathematical program with disjunctive subspaces constraints (MPDSC). Since a subspace is a special case of a convex polyhedral set, MPDSC is a special case of the mathematical program with disjunctive constraints (MPDC). Using the special structure of subspaces, we are able to obtain more precise formulas for the tangent and (directional) normal cones for the disjunctive set of subspaces. We then obtain first and second order optimality conditions by using the corresponding results from MPDC. Thanks to the special structure of the subspace, we are able to obtain some results for MPDSC that do not hold in general for MPDC. In particular we show that the relaxed constant positive linear dependence (RCPLD) is a sufficient condition for the metric subregularity/error bound property for MPDSC which is not true for MPDC in general. Finally we show that under all constraint qualifications presented in this paper, certain exact penalization holds for CCOP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it