2019
DOI: 10.1109/tit.2018.2863700
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sharp Oracle Inequalities for Stationary Points of Nonconvex Penalized M-Estimators

Abstract: Many statistical estimation procedures lead to nonconvex optimization problems. Algorithms to solve these are often guaranteed to output a stationary point of the optimization problem. Oracle inequalities are an important theoretical instrument to asses the statistical performance of an estimator. Oracle results have focused on the theoretical properties of the uncomputable (global) minimum or maximum. In the present work a general framework used for convex optimization problems to derive oracle inequalities f… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The estimation errors match the lower bounds up to constant factor using Tukey's depth (Mizera et al 2002). Elsener and van de Geer (2018) and Loh (2017) studied non-convex M-estimators. Lugosi and Mendelson (2019) and Lugosi and Mendelson (2020) considered the median-of-mean tournament (Jerrum, Valiant andVazirani 1986, Nemirovsky andYudin 1983).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 52%
“…The estimation errors match the lower bounds up to constant factor using Tukey's depth (Mizera et al 2002). Elsener and van de Geer (2018) and Loh (2017) studied non-convex M-estimators. Lugosi and Mendelson (2019) and Lugosi and Mendelson (2020) considered the median-of-mean tournament (Jerrum, Valiant andVazirani 1986, Nemirovsky andYudin 1983).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 52%
“…Remark We make use of the same terminology as in Elsener and van de Geer () for condition : empirical process condition. To verify the empirical process condition, we often need ad hoc techniques.…”
Section: Deterministic Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As far as the nonconvex estimator is concerned, it is convenient to view it as a penalized empirical risk minimizer. The empirical risk and its theoretical counterpart, the risk, are defined for all β as Rn(β)=14normal∑˜ββTF2,R(β)=ERn(β). Their derivatives are respectively given by Ṙn(β)=βRn(β),Ṙ(β)=EṘn(β). The estimator trueβ^ was proposed in van de Geer () and further analysed in Janková and van de Geer () and Elsener and van de Geer () in the special case of sparse PCA. The following lemma parallels Lemma 2 of Janková and van de Geer ().…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Non-convex optimization and statistics: Lastly, an active line of work exist in nonconvex estimation problems in which various statistical and algorithmic guarantees of a non-convex M-estimator are studied (Loh and Wainwright, 2012;Yang et al, 2015;Mei et al, 2018;Elsener and van de Geer, 2019). Our objective turns out to be a non-convex function of parameters, and our work utilizes a number of tools in non-convex literature to obtain statistical and algorithmic guarantees of the proposed estimator which is a stationary point of the non-convex objective function.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%