<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Statistical guarantees for the EM algorithm: From population to sample-based analysis · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1408.2156/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1408.2156/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Statistical guarantees for the EM algorithm: From population to sample-based analysis — mentioned by mturmon</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16223492</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1408.2156:16223492</guid><pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2018 15:41:23 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;There has been a big question about the place of convex relaxations for solving learning problems, and this responds to that question. That is, you have a learning problem with some fit criterion that is non-convex. Maybe you choose a different objective function, or different parameterization of the problem, so that it is convex. Then you can use a convex solver to find the guaranteed optimum of the &amp;quot;wrong&amp;quot; problem. Using convex relaxations has been a trend for perhaps 20 years - it avoids a whole bunch of nagging &amp;quot;what if my solution is just a local max&amp;quot; questions. Or, you can use older…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1408.2156/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>math.ST</category></item></channel></rss>
