MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W51219890

EXACT REGULARIZATION OF LINEAR PROGRAMS

2005· article· en· W51219890 on OpenAlexaff
Michael P. Friedlander

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegularization (linguistics)MathematicsBackus–Gilbert methodRegularization perspectives on support vector machinesProximal gradient methods for learningSolution setApplied mathematicsRegular polygonMathematical optimizationMathematical analysisSet (abstract data type)Tikhonov regularizationComputer scienceInverse problemGeometryArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We show that linear programs (LPs) admit regularizations that either contract the original (primal) solution set or leave it unchanged. Any regularization function that is convex and has compact level sets is allowed; differentiability is not required. This is an extension of the result first described by Mangasarian and Meyer (SIAM J. Control Optim., 17(6), pp. 745–752, 1979). We show that there always exist positive values of the regularization parameter such that a solution of the regularized problem simultaneously minimizes the original LP and minimizes the regularization function over the original solution set. We illustrate the main result using the nondifferentiable ℓ1 regularization function on a set of degenerate LPs. Numerical results demonstrate how such an approach yields sparse solutions from the application of an interior-point method.

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)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207