REVIEW 1 cited by
A constructive approach to strengthen algebraic descriptions of function and operator classes
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
It is well known that functions (resp. operators) satisfying a property~$p$ on a subset $Q\subset \mathbb{R}^d$ cannot necessarily be extended to a function (resp. operator) satisfying~$p$ on the whole of~$\mathbb{R}^d$. Given $Q \subseteq \mathbb{R}^d$, this work considers the problem of obtaining necessary and ideally sufficient conditions to be satisfied by a function (resp. operator) on $Q$, ensuring the existence of an extension of this function (resp. operator) satisfying $p$ on $\mathbb{R}^d$. More precisely, given some property $p$, we present a refinement procedure to obtain stronger necessary conditions to be imposed on $Q$. This procedure can be applied iteratively until the stronger conditions are also sufficient. We illustrate the procedure on a few examples, including the strengthening of existing descriptions for the classes of smooth functions satisfying a \L{}ojasiewicz condition, convex blockwise smooth functions, Lipschitz monotone operators, strongly monotone cocoercive operators, and uniformly convex functions. In most cases, these strengthened descriptions can be represented, or relaxed, to semi-definite constraints, which can be used to formulate tractable optimization problems on functions (resp. operators) within those classes.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Performance Estimation of second-order optimization methods on classes of univariate functions
The paper derives exact univariate interpolation conditions for second-order function classes and uses them to improve and certify worst-case guarantees for Newton-type methods.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.