MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388904464 · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2023.10.619

Distributed optimization by Newton consensus over connected digraphs

2023· article· en· W4388904464 on OpenAlexafffund
Martin Guay

Bibliographic record

VenueIFAC-PapersOnLine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHessian matrixNewton's methodQuasi-Newton methodComputer scienceMathematical optimizationComputationDistributed algorithmGraphLaplace operatorMathematicsAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceApplied mathematicsDistributed computingNonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, a Newton consensus method is proposed for the distributed optimization of a multi-agent systems operating over strongly connected digraphs. The approach proposes an approximate Newton step for both the primal and dual problems that can be implemented in a completely decentralized fashion. The asymmetry in the communication network is addressed by computing an approximate Newton step that only requires the out-Laplacian. The proposed Newton consensus approach does not require the exchange of derivative information between agents. In addition, the optimization approach avoids the explicit inversion of the approximate Hessian information for the computation of the Newton step. A simulation study demonstrates the effectiveness of the technique.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIFAC-PapersOnLineSame topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207