News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by frankreyes on Sunday July 30, 2023 @06:17AM (#36929678)
Hobest question, why not just use a binary/ternary search? It's because there's no known a priori how many local maximum and/or minimums?

Because that's just an iterative/recursive version of binary/ternary search.

Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by alfla on Sunday July 30, 2023 @06:41AM (#36929802)
How would you do a binary search on a continuous space without discretizing?
Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by frankreyes on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:34AM (#36940370)
Replace A[x] with f(x) and done.

A modified binary search called ternary search is well known used to find when derivative = 0, numerically.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ternary_search

Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by n2d4 on Sunday July 30, 2023 @06:48AM (#36929834)
What would you search for, the zero/root in the derivative? Imagine the derivative is a function like y=x^2-eps with some small eps, say 0.000001. For binary search like that to work, you need to start with two values x1 and x2 such that sign(y1) != sign(y2). But with the derivative above those values are hard to find with random initialization.

More generally, for binary search to find a value x such that f(x)=0, we need to have f(any value less than x)<0 and f(any value greater than x)>0. We can't guarantee these properties for general derivatives.

Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by jdthedisciple on Sunday July 30, 2023 @07:03AM (#36929922)
> What would you search for

I imagine you could search until the incremental change between your current and last result is below some threshold epsilon, as a kind of stopping criterion.

Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by frankreyes on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:36AM (#36940376)
IEEE 754 is by default limited by 64 bits, so yes.
Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by BazookaMusic on Sunday July 30, 2023 @07:38AM (#36930132)
This is probably what you're thinking of:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisection_method

Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by rg111 on Sunday July 30, 2023 @08:03AM (#36930314)
Because the search space is tremendously huge.
Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by AbrahamParangi on Sunday July 30, 2023 @08:30AM (#36930510)
Try doing binary search on a space of nontrivial dimensionality (ie, not 1, 2, or 3) and you will have your answer.
Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by eterevsky on Sunday July 30, 2023 @08:39AM (#36930569)
Binary search only works on sorted data.
Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by amelius on Sunday July 30, 2023 @08:42AM (#36930595)
Because of the dimensionality of the problem. Bracketing is easy to do in 1D space, not so in N-dimensional space, with large N.
Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by whatever1 on Sunday July 30, 2023 @11:18AM (#36932055)
We do, it’s called global optimization. It works for small problems with ~ 1000 variables or so. Check BARON.
Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by frankreyes on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:39AM (#36940394)
Thanks!
Re:Computer Scientists Discover Limits of Gradient Descent by geysersam on Sunday July 30, 2023 @11:31AM (#36932244)
Binary search only works in 1D parameter space