HackerPapers

arXiv:1711.00841math.OC

Lower Bounds for Finding Stationary Points II: First-Order Methods

Yair Carmon, John C. Duchi, Oliver Hinder, Aaron Sidford

Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.

Abstract

We establish lower bounds on the complexity of finding $ε$-stationary points of smooth, non-convex high-dimensional functions using first-order methods. We prove that deterministic first-order methods, even applied to arbitrarily smooth functions, cannot achieve convergence rates in $ε$ better than $ε^{-8/5}$, which is within $ε^{-1/15}\log\frac{1}ε$ of the best known rate for such methods. Moreover, for functions with Lipschitz first and second derivatives, we prove no deterministic first-order method can achieve convergence rates better than $ε^{-12/7}$, while $ε^{-2}$ is a lower bound for functions with only Lipschitz gradient. For convex functions with Lipschitz gradient, accelerated gradient descent achieves the rate $ε^{-1}\log\frac{1}ε$, showing that finding stationary points is easier given convexity.

arXiv comments
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
math.OCOptimization and Control

On Hacker News

Linked by 1 identifiable commenter in 1 comment across 1 thread, from Jun 2020 to Jun 2020.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments1 thread

    • Depending on the level you're looking for, I'm always a huge fan of Rockafellar [0] for the more mathematical expositions (they're lovely, clear, and very well thought through). Even in this case, though, subgradients may not exist (they're only guaranteed to exist for convex…

      LolWolfView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.