The Augmented Weak Sharpness of Solution Sets in Equilibrium Problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study considers equilibrium problems, focusing on identifying finite solutions for feasible solution sequences. We introduce an innovative extension of the weak sharp minimum concept from convex programming to equilibrium problems, coining this as weak sharpness for solution sets. Recognizing situations where the solution set may not exhibit weak sharpness, we propose an augmented mapping approach to mitigate this limitation. The core of our research is the formulation of augmented weak sharpness for the solution set. This comprehensive concept encapsulates both weak sharpness and strong non-degeneracy within feasible solution sequences. Crucially, we identify a necessary and sufficient condition for the finite termination of these sequences under the premise of augmented weak sharpness for the solution set in equilibrium problems. This condition significantly broadens the scope of the existing literature, which often assumes the solution set to be weakly sharp or strongly non-degenerate, especially in mathematical programming and variational inequality problems. Our findings not only shed light on the termination conditions in equilibrium problems but also introduce a less stringent sufficient condition for the finite termination of various optimization algorithms. This research, therefore, makes a substantial contribution to the field by enhancing our understanding of termination conditions in equilibrium problems and expanding the applicability of established theories to a wider range of optimization scenarios.
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 | 0.006 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".