Published 11 Nov 2019 in math.OC, cs.LG, cs.NA, math.NA, and stat.ML | (1911.04221v2)
Abstract: The main result of this paper is: {\bf Theorem.} Let f:R<sup>k→</sup>R be a C<sup>1 function, so that ∇f is locally Lipschitz continuous. Assume moreover that f is C<sup>2 near its generalised saddle points. Fix real numbers $\delta_0>0$ and $0<\alpha <1$. Then there is a smooth function h:R<sup>k→</sup>(0,δ0] so that the map H:R<sup>k→</sup>R<sup>k defined by H(x)=x−h(x)∇f(x) has the following property: (i) For all x∈R<sup>k, we have f(H(x)))−f(x)≤−αh(x)∣∣∇f(x)∣∣<sup>2. (ii) For every x0∈R<sup>k, the sequence xn+1=H(xn) either satisfies limn→∞∣∣xn+1−xn∣∣=0 or limn→∞∣∣xn∣∣=∞. Each cluster point of xn is a critical point of f. If moreover f has at most countably many critical points, then xn either converges to a critical point of f or limn→∞∣∣xn∣∣=∞. (iii) There is a set E<em>1⊂R<sup>k of Lebesgue measure $0$ so that for all x0∈R<sup>k\</sup>E1, the sequence x</em>n+1=H(xn), {\bf if converges}, cannot converge to a {\bf generalised} saddle point. (iv) There is a set E<em>2⊂R<sup>k of Lebesgue measure $0$ so that for all x0∈R<sup>k\</sup>E2, any cluster point of the sequence x</em>n+1=H(xn) is not a saddle point, and more generally cannot be an isolated generalised saddle point. Some other results are proven.