MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392082757 · doi:10.3934/ipi.2024005

A preconditioned alternating minimization framework for nonconvex and half quadratic regularization

2024· article· en· W4392082757 on OpenAlexaff
Shengxiang Deng, Ismail Ben Ayed, Hongpeng Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueInverse Problems and Imaging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegularization (linguistics)MinificationQuadratic equationComputer scienceMathematical optimizationApplied mathematicsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For some typical and widely used non-convex half-quadratic regularization models and the Ambrosio-Tortorelli approximate Mumford-Shah model, based on the Kurdyka-Łojasiewicz analysis and the recent nonconvex proximal algorithms, we developed an efficient preconditioned framework aiming at the linear subproblems that appeared in the nonlinear alternating minimization procedure. Solving large-scale linear subproblems is always important and challenging for lots of alternating minimization algorithms. By incorporating the efficient and classical preconditioned iterations into the nonlinear and nonconvex optimization, we prove that only one or any finite times preconditioned iterations are needed for the linear subproblems without controlling the error as the usual inexact solvers. The proposed preconditioned framework in finite-dimensional space can provide great flexibility and efficiency for dealing with linear subproblems and guarantee global convergence for lots of nonlinear and nonconvex regularization models.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInverse Problems and ImagingSame topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207