An Algorithm with Optimal Dimension-Dependence for Zero-Order Nonsmooth Nonconvex Stochastic Optimization

Overview

• The paper addresses the complexity of finding (δ,ε)-stationary points for Lipschitz objectives that may be non-smooth and non-convex, using only noisy function evaluations.
• Recent works proposed stochastic zero-order algorithms for this task, but they suffered from a dimension-dependence of Ω(d^{3/2}) where d is the problem dimension, which was conjectured to be optimal.
• The authors refute this conjecture by providing a faster algorithm with complexity O(dδ^{-1}ε^{-3}), which is optimal (up to constants) with respect to both d and the accuracy parameters δ and ε.
• The authors also show that their algorithm achieves the optimal convergence rate for smooth objectives, proving that in the non-convex stochastic zero-order setting, non-smooth optimization is as easy as smooth optimization.

Plain English Explanation

The paper tackles the problem of finding points that are close to being stationary (i.e., points where the gradient is small) for objectives that are Lipschitz continuous, meaning their slope is bounded. These objectives can be non-smooth and non-convex, which means they may have sharp corners or irregular shapes.

The researchers were able to develop a new algorithm that can find these approximately stationary points more efficiently than previous methods. Previous algorithms had a complexity that grew quickly with the problem dimension d, meaning they became very slow as the problem size increased.

The new algorithm, on the other hand, has a complexity that grows much more slowly with d, and is also optimal with respect to the accuracy parameters δ and ε that control how close the algorithm must get to a stationary point. This means the new algorithm is the best possible in terms of its dependence on the problem size and the required accuracy.

Importantly, the researchers also show that their algorithm achieves the optimal convergence rate even for objectives that are smooth (i.e., have a continuous gradient). This means that for non-convex stochastic optimization problems, non-smooth objectives are just as easy to optimize as smooth ones, which was not previously known.

Technical Explanation

The paper studies the complexity of producing (δ,ε)-stationary points of Lipschitz objectives, which may be non-smooth and non-convex, using only noisy function evaluations. Recent works, such as those discussed in this paper and this paper, have proposed several stochastic zero-order algorithms to solve this task. However, all of these algorithms suffer from a dimension-dependence of Ω(d^{3/2}) where d is the problem dimension, which was conjectured to be optimal.

The authors of the current paper refute this conjecture by providing a faster algorithm that has complexity O(dδ^{-1}ε^{-3}), which is optimal (up to numerical constants) with respect to d and also optimal with respect to the accuracy parameters δ and ε. This solves an open question posed in this paper.

Moreover, the authors show that the convergence rate achieved by their algorithm is also optimal for smooth objectives, proving that in the non-convex stochastic zero-order setting, non-smooth optimization is as easy as smooth optimization, as discussed in this paper and this paper.

The authors' analysis is based on a simple yet powerful lemma regarding the Goldstein-subdifferential set, which allows them to utilize recent advancements in first-order non-smooth non-convex optimization.

Critical Analysis

The paper makes a significant contribution by providing a faster algorithm for finding approximately stationary points of Lipschitz objectives in the stochastic zero-order setting. The authors' analysis is rigorous and their results are impressive, as they are able to match or beat the optimal rates for both smooth and non-smooth objectives.

One potential limitation of the work is that it assumes access to only noisy function evaluations, which may not always be the case in practical applications. It would be interesting to see if the authors' techniques could be extended to settings with additional information, such as noisy gradient estimates.

Additionally, the paper does not provide extensive numerical experiments to validate the practical performance of the proposed algorithm. While the theoretical guarantees are strong, it would be helpful to see how the algorithm compares to other state-of-the-art methods on real-world benchmarks.

Overall, this paper represents an important advance in the theory of non-convex optimization under uncertainty, and the authors' insights could potentially lead to further breakthroughs in this active area of research.

Conclusion

The key takeaways from this paper are:

1. The authors provide a new stochastic zero-order algorithm for finding (δ,ε)-stationary points of Lipschitz objectives that is considerably faster than previous methods, with an optimal dependence on both the problem dimension and the accuracy parameters.

2. Their algorithm achieves the same optimal convergence rate for both smooth and non-smooth objectives, showing that in the non-convex stochastic zero-order setting, non-smooth optimization is no harder than smooth optimization.

3. The authors' analysis relies on a novel lemma regarding the Goldstein-subdifferential set, demonstrating the power of tools from non-smooth optimization to tackle challenging non-convex problems.

These results push the boundaries of what is possible for non-convex optimization under uncertainty, and could have significant implications for a wide range of applications in machine learning, signal processing, and beyond.