3
$\begingroup$

I am using the package libLBFGS in order to minimize an objective function, for which the first derivative (with respect to the optimization variable) is known and computable. I use the default parameters, as shown in the sample code of the above webpage. The code runs and the optimal solution is obtained. The problem lies in the initialization phase. Although for some initial values the optimal solutions are suitable, for different ones (even just a bit different) the optimal solutions differ, sometimes a lot. I would like to ask the following:

a) If the above problem concerns the convexity of the optimization function, could I prove that the LBFGS algorithm will or will not converge?

b) Has anyone else used that library (libLBFGS) for optimizing unconstrained, non-linear before? I am not sure, but I think I am missing something in tuning the algorithm via the API of the library. The documentation of the API is not clear enough, I think...

c) Would you say that implementing the LBFGS from scrath is a feasible/rational choice?

Thanks a lot!

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Have you checked that your derivatives are correct? Is your cost convex? $\endgroup$ – copper.hat Dec 20 '13 at 16:37
  • $\begingroup$ My derivatives seem to be correct. By 'cost' you mean the whole objective function, or a part of it. In both cases, I am not sure whether the function is convex or not. But if we say that it's not convex, does the situation above seems reasonable (different initialization --> different solution)? $\endgroup$ – nullgeppetto Dec 20 '13 at 16:46
  • $\begingroup$ In general, yes (take $x \mapsto \sin x$ for example). But it is impossible to say without knowing the details. Your application will have some notion of scale, in general if initial points are 'close' you would expect the results to be 'close', purely because BFGS is usually a descent method (I do not know the specifics of the LBFGS method). $\endgroup$ – copper.hat Dec 20 '13 at 16:52
0
$\begingroup$

I kept trying to study my objective function as well as the way I employ the L-BFGS algorithm to minimize it. I am pretty sure (I haven't proven it yet, but by plotting it in different cases I can confirm that) my objective function is convex. However, the L-BFGS algorithm does not converge to the same solution when I try different initializations. Now it's more stable, but it still does not behave as I would prefer...

Has anyone else worked with the L-BFGS algorithm before? My main issue now is the initialization stage, and why it affects that much the final results ... In addition, could the various parameters of the algorith be responsible for not finding the same solution under different initialization values? Thanks!

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The theory states that if the method converges, then it converges to a local minimum. Is your cost function strictly convex? it might be that it is constant on a line or something. Is your convergence criterion too weak, such that the stopping criterion is met too early? Is your cost function sufficiently smooth? $\endgroup$ – Max Oct 13 '15 at 8:59

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.