Inexact subgradient methods for semialgebraic functions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motivated by the extensive application of approximate gradients in machine learning and optimization, we investigate inexact subgradient methods subject to persistent additive errors. Within a nonconvex semialgebraic framework, assuming boundedness or coercivity, we establish that the method yields iterates that eventually fluctuate near the critical set at a proximity characterized by an $O(ε^ρ)$ distance, where $ε$ denotes the magnitude of subgradient evaluation errors, and $ρ$ encapsulates geometric characteristics of the underlying problem. Our analysis comprehensively addresses both vanishing and constant step-size regimes. Notably, the latter regime inherently enlarges the fluctuation region, yet this enlargement remains on the order of $ε^ρ$. In the convex scenario, employing a universal error bound applicable to coercive semialgebraic functions, we derive novel complexity results concerning averaged iterates. Additionally, our study produces auxiliary results of independent interest, including descent-type lemmas for nonsmooth nonconvex functions and an invariance principle governing the behavior of algorithmic sequences under small-step limits.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".