In Gaussian matrix sensing, nonconvex factorized least squares is asymptotically equivalent to matrix hard thresholding, while convex nuclear-norm regularization behaves like soft thresholding, making nonconvex no worse in MSE.
Can Learning Be Explained By Local Optimality In Robust Low-rank Matrix Recovery?
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
We explore the local landscape of low-rank matrix recovery, focusing on reconstructing a $d_1\times d_2$ matrix $X^\star$ with rank $r$ from $m$ linear measurements, some potentially noisy. When the noise is distributed according to an outlier model, minimizing a nonsmooth $\ell_1$-loss with a simple sub-gradient method can often perfectly recover the ground truth matrix $X^\star$. Given this, a natural question is what optimization property (if any) enables such learning behavior. The most plausible answer is that the ground truth $X^\star$ manifests as a local optimum of the loss function. In this paper, we provide a strong negative answer to this question, showing that, under moderate assumptions, the true solutions corresponding to $X^\star$ do not emerge as local optima, but rather as strict saddle points -- critical points with strictly negative curvature in at least one direction. Our findings challenge the conventional belief that all strict saddle points are undesirable and should be avoided.
fields
math.ST 1years
2025 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
A High-Dimensional Statistical Theory for Convex and Nonconvex Matrix Sensing
In Gaussian matrix sensing, nonconvex factorized least squares is asymptotically equivalent to matrix hard thresholding, while convex nuclear-norm regularization behaves like soft thresholding, making nonconvex no worse in MSE.