2023-03-24 Gradient Descent
Contents
2023-03-24 Gradient Descent#
Last time#
Assumptions of linear models
Look at your data!
Partial derivatives
Loss functions
Today#
Discuss projects
Gradient-based optimization for linear models
Nonlinear models
using LinearAlgebra
using Plots
default(linewidth=4, legendfontsize=12)
function vander(x, k=nothing)
if isnothing(k)
k = length(x)
end
m = length(x)
V = ones(m, k)
for j in 2:k
V[:, j] = V[:, j-1] .* x
end
V
end
function vander_chebyshev(x, n=nothing)
if isnothing(n)
n = length(x) # Square by default
end
m = length(x)
T = ones(m, n)
if n > 1
T[:, 2] = x
end
for k in 3:n
#T[:, k] = x .* T[:, k-1]
T[:, k] = 2 * x .* T[:,k-1] - T[:, k-2]
end
T
end
function chebyshev_regress_eval(x, xx, n)
V = vander_chebyshev(x, n)
vander_chebyshev(xx, n) / V
end
runge(x) = 1 / (1 + 10*x^2)
runge_noisy(x, sigma) = runge.(x) + randn(size(x)) * sigma
CosRange(a, b, n) = (a + b)/2 .+ (b - a)/2 * cos.(LinRange(-pi, 0, n))
vcond(mat, points, nmax) = [cond(mat(points(-1, 1, n))) for n in 2:nmax]
vcond (generic function with 1 method)
Workshopping projects today#
Maybe you’ve started, maybe you’re still looking for a good project
What have you been thinking about?
What do you need help on?
Each breakout group will report out#
One interesting thing about process
One question you have relevant to the projects (specific or general)
One question from content we’ve covered
Variational notation for derivatives#
It’s convenient to express derivatives in terms of how they act on an infinitessimal perturbation. So we might write
(It’s common to use \(\delta x\) or \(dx\) for these infinitesimals.) This makes inner products look like a normal product rule
A powerful example of variational notation is differentiating a matrix inverse
and thus
Optimization for linear models#
Given data \((x,y)\) and loss function \(L(c; x,y)\), we wish to find the coefficients \(c\) that minimize the loss, thus yielding the “best predictor” (in a sense that can be made statistically precise). I.e.,
It is usually desirable to design models such that the loss function is differentiable with respect to the coefficients \(c\), because this allows the use of more efficient optimization methods. Recall that our forward model is given in terms of the Vandermonde matrix,
and thus
Derivative of loss function#
We now differentiate our loss function
A necessary condition for the loss function to be minimized is that \(\nabla_c L(c; x,y) = 0\).
Is the condition sufficient for general \(f(x, c)\)?
Is the condition sufficient for the linear model \(f(x,c) = V(x) c\)?
Have we seen this sort of equation before?
Gradient descent#
Instead of solving the least squares problem using linear algebra (QR factorization), we could solve it using gradient descent. That is, on each iteration, we’ll take a step in the direction of the negative gradient.
function grad_descent(loss, grad, c0; gamma=1e-3, tol=1e-5)
"""Minimize loss(c) via gradient descent with initial guess c0
using learning rate gamma. Declares convergence when gradient
is less than tol or after 500 steps.
"""
c = copy(c0)
chist = [copy(c)]
lhist = [loss(c)]
for it in 1:500
g = grad(c)
c -= gamma * g
push!(chist, copy(c))
push!(lhist, loss(c))
if norm(g) < tol
break
end
end
(c, hcat(chist...), lhist)
end
grad_descent (generic function with 1 method)
Quadratic model#
A = [1 1; 1 16]
@show svdvals(A)
loss(c) = .5 * c' * A * c
grad(c) = A * c
c, chist, lhist = grad_descent(loss, grad, [.9, .9],
gamma=.1)
plot(lhist, yscale=:log10, xlims=(0, 80))
svdvals(A) = [16.066372975210776, 0.9336270247892221]
plot(chist[1, :], chist[2, :], marker=:circle)
x = LinRange(-1, 1, 30)
contour!(x, x, (x,y) -> loss([x, y]))
Chebyshev regression via optimization#
x = LinRange(-1, 1, 200)
sigma = 0.5; n = 8
y = runge_noisy(x, sigma)
V = vander(x, n)
function loss(c)
r = V * c - y
.5 * r' * r
end
function grad(c)
r = V * c - y
V' * r
end
c, _, lhist = grad_descent(loss, grad, ones(n),
gamma=0.008)
c
8-element Vector{Float64}:
0.7800885298906851
0.2836271505109635
-1.8720460894700268
-0.5203321999964678
0.7855088416898993
-0.17270058768490062
0.38666850872087344
0.3286828627661006
c0 = V \ y
l0 = 0.5 * norm(V * c0 - y)^2
@show cond(V' * V)
plot(lhist, yscale=:log10)
plot!(i -> l0, color=:black)
cond(V' * V) = 52902.52994792632
Why use QR vs gradient-based optimization?#
Nonlinear models#
Instead of the linear model
We will also need the gradient
Fitting a rational function#
f(x, c) = 1 ./ (c[1] .+ c[2].*x + c[3].*x.^2)
function gradf(x, c)
f2 = f(x, c).^2
[-f2 -f2.*x -f2.*x.^2]
end
function loss(c)
r = f(x, c) - y
0.5 * r' * r
end
function gradient(c)
r = f(x, c) - y
vec(r' * gradf(x, c))
end
gradient (generic function with 1 method)
c, _, lhist = grad_descent(loss, gradient, ones(3), gamma=8e-2)
plot(lhist, yscale=:log10)
Compare fits on noisy data#
scatter(x, y, label=:none)
V = vander_chebyshev(x, 7)
plot!(x -> runge(x), color=:black, label="Runge")
plot!(x, V * (V \ y), label="Chebyshev fit")
plot!(x -> f(x, c), label="Rational fit")