MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7018862105

The eigenstep method: A new iterative method for unconstrained quadratic optimization.

2005· dissertation· en· W7018862105 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor) · 2005
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Optimization Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMethod of steepest descentGradient descentDimension (graph theory)Iterative methodHessian matrixDescent (aeronautics)MinificationConvex optimizationGradient method
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis presents a new method for the unconstrained minimization of convex quadratic programming problems. The method is an iterative method that is a modification of the classical steepest descent method. The methods are the same in the choice of the negative gradient as the search direction, but differ in the choice of step size. The steepest descent method uses the optimal step size, and the proposed method uses the reciprocal of the eigenvalues of the Hessian matrix as step sizes. Thus, the proposed method is referred to as the eigenstep method. It will be shown that the eigenstep method has finite termination with the number of iterations required being equal to the dimension of the problem, that is, the number of variables. Numerical examples will be provided to illustrate the algorithm, and a comparison is made to other standard optimization methods, including the steepest descent method.Dept. of Mathematics and Statistics. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2004 .B38. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 44-01, page: 0364. Thesis (M.Sc.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2005.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.281
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.323 · 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