Search

This short note considers and resolves the apparent contradiction between known worst-case complexity results for first- and second-order methods for solving unconstrained smooth nonconvex optimization problems and a recent note by Jarre [On Nesterov's smooth Chebyshev–Rosenbrock function, Optim. Methods Softw. (2011)] implying a very large lower bound on the number of iterations required to reach the solution's neighbourhood for a specific problem with variable dimension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The adaptive cubic regularization algorithms described in Cartis, Gould and Toint [Adaptive cubic regularisation methods for unconstrained optimization Part II: Worst-case function- and derivative-evaluation complexity, Math. Program. (2010), doi:10.1007/s10107-009-0337-y (online)]; [Part I: Motivation, convergence and numerical results, Math. Program. 127(2) (2011), pp. 245–295] for unconstrained (nonconvex) optimization are shown to have improved worst-case efficiency in terms of the function- and gradient-evaluation count when applied to convex and strongly convex objectives. In particular, our complexity upper bounds match in order (as a function of the accuracy of approximation), and sometimes even improve, those obtained by Nesterov [Introductory Lectures on Convex Optimization, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2004; Accelerating the cubic regularization of Newton's method on convex problems, Math. Program. 112(1) (2008), pp. 159–181] and Nesterov and Polyak [Cubic regularization of Newton's method and its global performance, Math. Program. 108(1) (2006), pp. 177–205] for these same problem classes, without requiring exact Hessians or exact or global solution of the subproblem. An additional outcome of our approximate approach is that our complexity results can naturally capture the advantages of both first- and second-order methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]