Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Oracle Complexity in Nonsmooth Nonconvex Optimization

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2104.06763 v3 pith:D5DZOCUY submitted 2021-04-14 math.OC cs.LG

classification math.OCcs.LG
keywords nonconvexoptimizationepsilonsmoothcomplexitynonsmoothfunctionmethods
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

It is well-known that given a smooth, bounded-from-below, and possibly nonconvex function, standard gradient-based methods can find $\epsilon$-stationary points (with gradient norm less than $\epsilon$) in $\mathcal{O}(1/\epsilon^2)$ iterations. However, many important nonconvex optimization problems, such as those associated with training modern neural networks, are inherently not smooth, making these results inapplicable. In this paper, we study nonsmooth nonconvex optimization from an oracle complexity viewpoint, where the algorithm is assumed to be given access only to local information about the function at various points. We provide two main results: First, we consider the problem of getting near $\epsilon$-stationary points. This is perhaps the most natural relaxation of finding $\epsilon$-stationary points, which is impossible in the nonsmooth nonconvex case. We prove that this relaxed goal cannot be achieved efficiently, for any distance and $\epsilon$ smaller than some constants. Our second result deals with the possibility of tackling nonsmooth nonconvex optimization by reduction to smooth optimization: Namely, applying smooth optimization methods on a smooth approximation of the objective function. For this approach, we prove under a mild assumption an inherent trade-off between oracle complexity and smoothness: On the one hand, smoothing a nonsmooth nonconvex function can be done very efficiently (e.g., by randomized smoothing), but with dimension-dependent factors in the smoothness parameter, which can strongly affect iteration complexity when plugging into standard smooth optimization methods. On the other hand, these dimension factors can be eliminated with suitable smoothing methods, but only by making the oracle complexity of the smoothing process exponentially large.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. On computing Goldstein approximate second-order stationary points of structured nonsmooth nonconvex programs

    math.OC 2026-07 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    A randomized first-order algorithm computes Goldstein approximate second-order stationary points of L-smooth nonconvex functions with oracle complexity Õ(ΔL⁸n²/ε⁹ + ΔL⁶n³/ε⁷).

  2. On the hardness of deterministic second-order optimization of functions with Lipschitz gradients

    math.OC 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    No deterministic zero-respecting second-order algorithm can compute Goldstein approximate second-order stationary points of C^{1,1} functions within finitely many oracle calls; general deterministic algorithms need at...

Pith tools