A Stochastic Operator Framework for Optimization and Learning With Sub-Weibull Errors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a framework to study the convergence of stochastic optimization and learning algorithms. The framework is modeled over the different challenges that these algorithms pose, such as (i) the presence of random additive errors ( <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">e.g.</i> due to stochastic gradients), and (ii) random coordinate updates ( <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">e.g.</i> due to asynchrony in distributed set-ups). The paper covers both convex and strongly convex problems, and it also analyzes online scenarios, involving changes in the data and costs. The paper relies on interpreting stochastic algorithms as the iterated application of stochastic operators, thus allowing us to use the powerful tools of operator theory. In particular, we consider operators characterized by additive errors with sub-Weibull distribution (which parameterize a broad class of errors by their tail probability), and random updates. In this framework we derive convergence results in mean and in high probability, by providing bounds to the distance of the current iteration from a solution of the optimization or learning problem. The contributions are discussed in light of federated learning applications.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".