Regularization of Discrete Ill-Conditioned Problems Done Right -- I
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When solving rank-deficient or discrete ill-posed problems by regularization methods, the choice of the regularization parameter is crucial. It is also of interest, the regularization norm used in the selection of the solution. In this work, we propose a stabilization of the existing regularization methods to address the delicate task of choosing this parameter. The analysis we carried out is independent of the chosen regularization norm. Under an unperturbed data least squares problem and of a maximal rank matrix, the stabilized-regularized method we propose provides the minimal norm solution whatever the chosen positive regularization parameter. And under a perturbed data least squares problem, this approach provides increasingly accurate and stable approximations of the minimal norm solution with respect to a refined mesh and a huge regularization parameter (over-regularization). We also investigate standard rank-deficient and ill-posed numerical examples corroborating the theoretical analysis, where the accuracy and the stability of the proposed approach is widely discussed.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it