MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377130721 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.10634

Modified Gauss-Newton Algorithms under Noise

2023· preprint· en· W4377130721 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicStochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsStylized factGaussNoise (video)Stochastic gradient descentConvergence (economics)AlgorithmApplied mathematicsQuadratic equationGradient descentComputer scienceNewton's methodMathematicsMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceNonlinear systemArtificial neural networkPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gauss-Newton methods and their stochastic version have been widely used in machine learning and signal processing. Their nonsmooth counterparts, modified Gauss-Newton or prox-linear algorithms, can lead to contrasting outcomes when compared to gradient descent in large-scale statistical settings. We explore the contrasting performance of these two classes of algorithms in theory on a stylized statistical example, and experimentally on learning problems including structured prediction. In theory, we delineate the regime where the quadratic convergence of the modified Gauss-Newton method is active under statistical noise. In the experiments, we underline the versatility of stochastic (sub)-gradient descent to minimize nonsmooth composite objectives.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.071 · 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