Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 63 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 49 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 14 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 19 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 100 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 174 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 472 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 37 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Projection-free Online Exp-concave Optimization (2302.04859v1)

Published 9 Feb 2023 in cs.LG and math.OC

Abstract: We consider the setting of online convex optimization (OCO) with \textit{exp-concave} losses. The best regret bound known for this setting is $O(n\log{}T)$, where $n$ is the dimension and $T$ is the number of prediction rounds (treating all other quantities as constants and assuming $T$ is sufficiently large), and is attainable via the well-known Online Newton Step algorithm (ONS). However, ONS requires on each iteration to compute a projection (according to some matrix-induced norm) onto the feasible convex set, which is often computationally prohibitive in high-dimensional settings and when the feasible set admits a non-trivial structure. In this work we consider projection-free online algorithms for exp-concave and smooth losses, where by projection-free we refer to algorithms that rely only on the availability of a linear optimization oracle (LOO) for the feasible set, which in many applications of interest admits much more efficient implementations than a projection oracle. We present an LOO-based ONS-style algorithm, which using overall $O(T)$ calls to a LOO, guarantees in worst case regret bounded by $\widetilde{O}(n{2/3}T{2/3})$ (ignoring all quantities except for $n,T$). However, our algorithm is most interesting in an important and plausible low-dimensional data scenario: if the gradients (approximately) span a subspace of dimension at most $\rho$, $\rho << n$, the regret bound improves to $\widetilde{O}(\rho{2/3}T{2/3})$, and by applying standard deterministic sketching techniques, both the space and average additional per-iteration runtime requirements are only $O(\rho{}n)$ (instead of $O(n2)$). This improves upon recently proposed LOO-based algorithms for OCO which, while having the same state-of-the-art dependence on the horizon $T$, suffer from regret/oracle complexity that scales with $\sqrt{n}$ or worse.

Citations (6)
List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-Up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Authors (2)