arXiv:1711.00841math.OC
Lower Bounds for Finding Stationary Points II: First-Order Methods
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.
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