Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Philipp Reichenbach

dblp:262/3299 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
0000-0002-5722-5505ORCID · verified

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Theory of computation · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Mathematical optimization · 82% Computational complexity · 18%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Mathematical optimization
continuous optimization
0.512021
Barriers for Recent Methods in Geodesic Optimization · CCC 2021
Mathematical optimization › riemannian optimization
geodesically convex optimization
0.512021
Barriers for Recent Methods in Geodesic Optimization · CCC 2021
Mathematical optimization › numerical analysis
matrix scaling
0.512021
Barriers for Recent Methods in Geodesic Optimization · CCC 2021
Computational complexity › complexity classes › approximation classes
optimization complexity
0.512021
Barriers for Recent Methods in Geodesic Optimization · CCC 2021
Mathematical optimization › tensor optimization
tensor scaling
0.512021
Barriers for Recent Methods in Geodesic Optimization · CCC 2021
Mathematical optimization › continuous optimization
convex optimization
0.112021
Barriers for Recent Methods in Geodesic Optimization · CCC 2021
Mathematical optimization › numerical computation › numerical optimization › second-order methods
interior point methods
0.112021
Barriers for Recent Methods in Geodesic Optimization · CCC 2021

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

trust-region method · 0.5margin and gap analysis · 0.5box-constrained newton's method · 0.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2021 Barriers for Recent Methods in Geodesic Optimization
abstract
We study a class of optimization problems including matrix scaling, matrix balancing, multidimensional array scaling, operator scaling, and tensor scaling that arise frequently in theory and in practice. Some of these problems, such as matrix and array scaling, are convex in the Euclidean sense, but others such as operator scaling and tensor scaling are geodesically convex on a different Riemannian manifold. Trust region methods, which include box-constrained Newton's method, are known to produce high precision solutions very quickly for matrix scaling and matrix balancing (Cohen et. al., FOCS 2017, Allen-Zhu et. al. FOCS 2017), and result in polynomial time algorithms for some geodesically convex problems like operator scaling (Garg et. al. STOC 2018, Bürgisser et. al. FOCS 2019). One is led to ask whether these guarantees also hold for multidimensional array scaling and tensor scaling. We show that this is not the case by exhibiting instances with exponential diameter bound: we construct polynomial-size instances of 3-dimensional array scaling and 3-tensor scaling whose approximate solutions all have doubly exponential condition number. Moreover, we study convex-geometric notions of complexity known as margin and gap, which are used to bound the running times of all existing optimization algorithms for such problems. We show that margin and gap are exponentially small for several problems including array scaling, tensor scaling and polynomial scaling. Our results suggest that it is impossible to prove polynomial running time bounds for tensor scaling based on diameter bounds alone. Therefore, our work motivates the search for analogues of more sophisticated algorithms, such as interior point methods, for geodesically convex optimization that do not rely on polynomial diameter bounds.
Cole Franks, Philipp Reichenbach
CCC2