Goto

Collaborating Authors

 spurious local minima


How Much Restricted Isometry is Needed In Nonconvex Matrix Recovery?

Neural Information Processing Systems

When the linear measurements of an instance of low-rank matrix recovery satisfy a restricted isometry property (RIP) --- i.e. they are approximately norm-preserving --- the problem is known to contain no spurious local minima, so exact recovery is guaranteed. In this paper, we show that moderate RIP is not enough to eliminate spurious local minima, so existing results can only hold for near-perfect RIP. In fact, counterexamples are ubiquitous: every $x$ is the spurious local minimum of a rank-1 instance of matrix recovery that satisfies RIP. One specific counterexample has RIP constant $\delta=1/2$, but causes randomly initialized stochastic gradient descent (SGD) to fail 12\% of the time. SGD is frequently able to avoid and escape spurious local minima, but this empirical result shows that it can occasionally be defeated by their existence. Hence, while exact recovery guarantees will likely require a proof of no spurious local minima, arguments based solely on norm preservation will only be applicable to a narrow set of nearly-isotropic instances.


26e359e83860db1d11b6acca57d8ea88-Paper.pdf

Neural Information Processing Systems

Some recent results do consider residual-like elements (see discussion of related work below),butgenerallydonotapply tostandard architectures.





HowManySamplesisaGoodInitialPointWorthin Low-rankMatrixRecovery?

Neural Information Processing Systems

As a consequence, these global guarantees tend to be pessimistic, because the number of samples must be sufficiently large to eliminate spurious local minima everywhere, even at adversarial locations.



How many samples is a good initial point worth in Low-rank Matrix Recovery?

Neural Information Processing Systems

Given a sufficiently large amount of labeled data, the nonconvex low-rank matrix recovery problem contains no spurious local minima, so a local optimization algorithm is guaranteed to converge to a global minimum starting from any initial guess. However, the actual amount of data needed by this theoretical guarantee is very pessimistic, as it must prevent spurious local minima from existing anywhere, including at adversarial locations. In contrast, prior work based on good initial guesses have more realistic data requirements, because they allow spurious local minima to exist outside of a neighborhood of the solution. In this paper, we quantify the relationship between the quality of the initial guess and the corresponding reduction in data requirements. Using the restricted isometry constant as a surrogate for sample complexity, we compute a sharp "threshold" number of samples needed to prevent each specific point on the optimization landscape from becoming a spurious local minima. Optimizing the threshold over regions of the landscape, we see that, for initial points not too close to the ground truth, a linear improvement in the quality of the initial guess amounts to a constant factor improvement in the sample complexity.



How Much Restricted Isometry is Needed In Nonconvex Matrix Recovery?

Neural Information Processing Systems

When the linear measurements of an instance of low-rank matrix recovery satisfy a restricted isometry property (RIP) --- i.e. they are approximately norm-preserving --- the problem is known to contain no spurious local minima, so exact recovery is guaranteed. In this paper, we show that moderate RIP is not enough to eliminate spurious local minima, so existing results can only hold for near-perfect RIP. In fact, counterexamples are ubiquitous: every $x$ is the spurious local minimum of a rank-1 instance of matrix recovery that satisfies RIP. One specific counterexample has RIP constant $\delta=1/2$, but causes randomly initialized stochastic gradient descent (SGD) to fail 12\% of the time. SGD is frequently able to avoid and escape spurious local minima, but this empirical result shows that it can occasionally be defeated by their existence. Hence, while exact recovery guarantees will likely require a proof of no spurious local minima, arguments based solely on norm preservation will only be applicable to a narrow set of nearly-isotropic instances.