REVIEW 1 cited by
Convergence Analysis of the Alternating Anderson-Picard Method for Nonlinear Fixed-point Problems
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
abstract
Anderson Acceleration (AA) has been widely used to solve nonlinear fixed-point problems due to its rapid convergence. This work focuses on a variant of AA in which multiple Picard iterations are performed between each AA step, referred to as the Alternating Anderson-Picard (AAP) method. Despite introducing more ``slow'' Picard iterations, this method has been shown to be efficient and even more robust in both linear and nonlinear cases. However, there is a lack of theoretical analysis for AAP in the nonlinear case. In this paper, we address this gap by establishing the equivalence between AAP and a multisecant-GMRES method that uses GMRES to solve a multisecant linear system at each iteration. From this perspective, we show that AAP ``converges'' to the Newton-GMRES method. Specifically, as the residual approaches zero, the multisecant matrix, the approximate Jacobian inverse, the search direction, and the optimization gain of AAP converge to their counterparts in the Newton-GMRES method. These connections provide insights for analyzing the asymptotic convergence properties of AAP. Consequently, we show that AAP is locally $q$-linear convergent and provide an upper bound for the convergence factor of AAP. To validate the theoretical results, numerical examples are provided.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
A gradient-based and determinant-free framework for fully Bayesian Gaussian process regression
A determinant-free, gradient-based HMC sampler for fully Bayesian GPR that uses the pseudofermion trick and pole expansions to avoid the kernel determinant.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.