Adding support for Manifolds to Nelder-Mead #872
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #872 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 82.07% 82.15% +0.07%
==========================================
Files 43 43
Lines 2778 2790 +12
==========================================
+ Hits 2280 2292 +12
Misses 498 498
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
Hi, thanks! And sorry for the very late response. I've been finishing up my thesis in the fall and have had little time for these projects. We could move the retraction inside of the centroid call and just have the centroid call accept the method, but this solution also looks fine. HAve you run into any issues since October? If not, I'll merge this. Again, apologies for the late response. |
|
Dear Patrick,
There is no need to apologize! I assure you that I am slower to handle pull
requests on my (less used) packages. Really, I only handle them over breaks.
I am still using manifolds with Nelder-Mead, and still find it very useful.
BTW, if you like I would be happy to add support for the manifold of PSD
matrices if someone else hasn’t done it yet. I use them often.
Best wishes,
Dan
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 3:44 PM Patrick Kofod Mogensen < ***@***.***> wrote:
Hi, thanks! And sorry for the very late response. I've been finishing up
my thesis in the fall and have had little time for these projects. We could
move the retraction inside of the centroid call and just have the centroid
call accept the method, but this solution also looks fine. HAve you run
into any issues since October? If not, I'll merge this. Again, apologies
for the late response.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#872 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABWJKRL2FNRX2EJNVF7ENRDSVEL2JANCNFSM4SB26SUA>
.
--
Sent from mobile phone
|
Are you in the #manifolds channel on the julia slack? I asked a question about this earlier today. It was my impression that PSD matrices do not live on a manifold, only PD matrices. Edit: Oh, looking at your comment time stamp you mentioned this before I asked on slack. Interesting coincidence. |
|
I haven't looked at that channel.
I'll check it out.
I'll admit that I don't use slack much. But, I'll try to start.
Best,
Dan
…On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 1:42 PM Patrick Kofod Mogensen < ***@***.***> wrote:
BTW, if you like I would be happy to add support for the manifold of PSD
matrices if someone else hasn’t done it yet. I use them often.
Are you in the #manifolds channel on the julia slack? I literally asked a
question about this earlier today.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#872 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABWJKRLNIJPS7PRA3P6KG3DSWDSBRANCNFSM4SB26SUA>
.
|
|
Cool!. Alternatively you could check out the symmetric positive definite manifold from Manifolds https://juliamanifolds.github.io/Manifolds.jl/latest/manifolds/symmetricpositivedefinite.html and use nelder mead with that manifold in Manopt.jl, see https://manoptjl.org/stable/solvers/NelderMead.html Or check the symmetric positive semidefinite manifold of fixed rank matrices https://juliamanifolds.github.io/Manifolds.jl/latest/manifolds/symmetricpsdfixedrank.html – I haven't checked plain semidefinite symmetric matrices yet. |
Are you stealing my users on a PR in my own package? 😱 🤣 |
|
Maybe ;) One could also take the manifold mentioned as a starting point to add it here. |
I did this in the obvious way: retract! is applied to every vector created by Nelder-Mead. I have found this very useful for doing optimization over complicated manifolds. I used to handle optimizations of this sort by using an objective function of the form x -> obj( retract (x)). But, this causes Nelder-Mead to operate in the wrong space. Using the manifold approach has sped up some of my code a lot, and has allowed it to converge in situations that failed before.