Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Gradient Descent Methods for Regularized Optimization

Filip Nikolovski, Irena Stojkovska, Katerina Hadzi-Velkova Saneva, Zoran Hadzi-Velkov

TL;DR

The paper addresses regularized optimization, where non-differentiable terms like $\ell^1$ hinder plain gradient descent. It analyzes GD and proximal GD, derives convergence guarantees for Lipschitz-smooth and μ-strongly convex settings, and shows how proximal GD with a closed-form LASSO prox enables efficient handling of $\ell^1$ penalties through soft-thresholding. A novel variable step-size proximal GD method is proposed, estimating a local Lipschitz constant $L_k$ to set $\lambda_k$ and adjust step sizes adaptively, with theoretical discussion and empirical validation. Numerical results on synthetic and real data demonstrate that the variable-step approach reduces iteration counts and runtime relative to constant step sizes, while preserving comparable overall complexity and outperforming Adam for the tested sparse regression tasks. The work advances practical first-order methods for sparse and low-rank recovery by integrating local smoothness awareness into proximal optimization.

Abstract

Regularization is a widely recognized technique in mathematical optimization. It can be used to smooth out objective functions, refine the feasible solution set, or prevent overfitting in machine learning models. Due to its simplicity and robustness, the gradient descent (GD) method is one of the primary methods used for numerical optimization of differentiable objective functions. However, GD is not well-suited for solving $\ell^1$ regularized optimization problems since these problems are non-differentiable at zero, causing iteration updates to oscillate or fail to converge. Instead, a more effective version of GD, called the proximal gradient descent employs a technique known as soft-thresholding to shrink the iteration updates toward zero, thus enabling sparsity in the solution. Motivated by the widespread applications of proximal GD in sparse and low-rank recovery across various engineering disciplines, we provide an overview of the GD and proximal GD methods for solving regularized optimization problems. Furthermore, this paper proposes a novel algorithm for the proximal GD method that incorporates a variable step size. Unlike conventional proximal GD, which uses a fixed step size based on the global Lipschitz constant, our method estimates the Lipschitz constant locally at each iteration and uses its reciprocal as the step size. This eliminates the need for a global Lipschitz constant, which can be impractical to compute. Numerical experiments we performed on synthetic and real-data sets show notable performance improvement of the proposed method compared to the conventional proximal GD with constant step size, both in terms of number of iterations and in time requirements.

Gradient Descent Methods for Regularized Optimization

TL;DR

The paper addresses regularized optimization, where non-differentiable terms like hinder plain gradient descent. It analyzes GD and proximal GD, derives convergence guarantees for Lipschitz-smooth and μ-strongly convex settings, and shows how proximal GD with a closed-form LASSO prox enables efficient handling of penalties through soft-thresholding. A novel variable step-size proximal GD method is proposed, estimating a local Lipschitz constant to set and adjust step sizes adaptively, with theoretical discussion and empirical validation. Numerical results on synthetic and real data demonstrate that the variable-step approach reduces iteration counts and runtime relative to constant step sizes, while preserving comparable overall complexity and outperforming Adam for the tested sparse regression tasks. The work advances practical first-order methods for sparse and low-rank recovery by integrating local smoothness awareness into proximal optimization.

Abstract

Regularization is a widely recognized technique in mathematical optimization. It can be used to smooth out objective functions, refine the feasible solution set, or prevent overfitting in machine learning models. Due to its simplicity and robustness, the gradient descent (GD) method is one of the primary methods used for numerical optimization of differentiable objective functions. However, GD is not well-suited for solving regularized optimization problems since these problems are non-differentiable at zero, causing iteration updates to oscillate or fail to converge. Instead, a more effective version of GD, called the proximal gradient descent employs a technique known as soft-thresholding to shrink the iteration updates toward zero, thus enabling sparsity in the solution. Motivated by the widespread applications of proximal GD in sparse and low-rank recovery across various engineering disciplines, we provide an overview of the GD and proximal GD methods for solving regularized optimization problems. Furthermore, this paper proposes a novel algorithm for the proximal GD method that incorporates a variable step size. Unlike conventional proximal GD, which uses a fixed step size based on the global Lipschitz constant, our method estimates the Lipschitz constant locally at each iteration and uses its reciprocal as the step size. This eliminates the need for a global Lipschitz constant, which can be impractical to compute. Numerical experiments we performed on synthetic and real-data sets show notable performance improvement of the proposed method compared to the conventional proximal GD with constant step size, both in terms of number of iterations and in time requirements.
Paper Structure (11 sections, 6 theorems, 72 equations, 4 figures, 1 table, 2 algorithms)

This paper contains 11 sections, 6 theorems, 72 equations, 4 figures, 1 table, 2 algorithms.

Key Result

Theorem 1

Let $f$ be continuously differentiable, convex and $L$-smooth function with a global minimizer $x^*$. Let $\{x_k\}$ be the sequence generated by the GD method GDMethod with a constant step size $\lambda_k \equiv \lambda = \frac{1}{L}$. Then:

Figures (4)

  • Figure 1: Comparison of the progress of the sequence $\{F(x_k)\}$ of function values generated by Algorithm \ref{['alg:01']} (constant step), Algorithm \ref{['alg:02']} (variable step), and Adam on the synthetically generated data sets for: (a) $d=300$; (b) $d=500$; (c) $d=800$.
  • Figure 2: Comparison of the progress of the sequence $\{x_k\}$ of iterates generated by Algorithm \ref{['alg:01']} (constant step), Algorithm \ref{['alg:02']} (variable step), and Adam towards the optimal solution $x^*$ on the synthetically generated data sets for: (a) $d=300$; (b) $d=500$; (c) $d=800$.
  • Figure 3: Changes of the step sizes $\lambda_k$ generated by the scheme given in Algorithm \ref{['alg:02']}on the synthetically generated data sets for different values of $d$. The value of the constant step $\lambda = 1/L$ is given for comparison. For all three dimensions, $1/L \approx 0.64$.
  • Figure 4: Comparison of the progress of the sequence $\{F(x_k)\}$ of function values generated by Algorithm \ref{['alg:01']} (constant step), Algorithm \ref{['alg:02']} (variable step), and Adam on the King County house prices data set.

Theorems & Definitions (13)

  • Theorem 1
  • proof
  • Theorem 2
  • proof
  • Lemma 1
  • proof
  • Theorem 3
  • proof
  • Remark 1
  • Lemma 2
  • ...and 3 more