MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417035030 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.03947

Data-Dependent Complexity of First-Order Methods for Binary Classification

2025· preprint· W4417035030 on OpenAlexfundno aff
M. E. Hough, Stephen A. Vavasis

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicStochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSublinear functionHyperplaneIterated functionData pointUpper and lower boundsMNIST databaseBinary numberOptimization problemSupport vector machineTime complexity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-scale problems in data science are often modeled with optimization, and the optimization model is usually solved with first-order methods that may converge at a sublinear rate. Therefore, it is of interest to terminate the optimization algorithm as soon as the underlying data science task is accomplished. We consider FISTA for solving two binary classification problems: the ellipsoid separation problem (ESP), and the soft-margin support-vector machine (SVM). For the ESP, we cast the dual second-order cone program into a form amenable to FISTA and show that the FISTA residual converges to the infimal displacement vector of the primal-dual hybrid gradient (PDHG) algorithm, that directly encodes a separating hyperplane. We further derive a data-dependent iteration upper bound scaling as $\mathcal{O}(1/δ_{\mathcal{A}}^2)$, where $δ_{\mathcal{A}}$ is the minimal perturbation that destroys separability. For the SVM, we propose a strongly-concave perturbed dual that admits efficient FISTA updates under a linear time projection scheme, and with our parameter choices, the objective has small condition number, enabling rapid convergence. We prove that, under a reasonable data model, early-stopped iterates identify well-classified points and yield a hyperplane that exactly separates them, where the accuracy required of the dual iterate is governed by geometric properties of the data. In particular, the proposed early-stopping criteria diminish the need for hard-to-select tolerance-based stopping conditions. Our numerical experiments on ESP instances derived from MNIST data and on soft-margin SVM benchmarks indicate competitive runtimes and substantial speedups from stopping early.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.337
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.095 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicStochastic Gradient Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207