Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck pass
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

PDHG has an O(1/k) ergodic saddle-gap bound

Statement

Assume the hypotheses of Chambolle–Pock primal-dual hybrid gradient and that Φ(x,y)=f(x)+⟨Kx,y⟩−g∗(y) has a saddle point (x∗,y∗) in the sense of Saddle points of extended-real Lagrangians. For N≥1 define xˉN=1N∑k=0N−1xk+1,yˉN=1N∑k=0N−1yk+1. For every x∈dom⁡f, y∈dom⁡g∗, Φ(xˉN,y)−Φ(x,yˉN)≤1N(∥x−x0∥222τ+∥y−y0∥222σ). In particular, the saddle gap Φ(xˉN,y∗)−Φ(x∗,yˉN) is nonnegative and obeys this bound with (x,y)=(x∗,y∗). On bounded test sets the displayed upper bound is O(1/N). This is an ergodic gap statement; it is not a pointwise objective bound and does not assert pointwise iterate convergence.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The exact PDHG recurrence, positive steps with τσ∥K∥22<1, and a saddle point.

[A1]

The exact recurrence, strict step condition, and a saddle point hold.

[F1]

Chambolle–Pock primal-dual hybrid gradient: f,g∗ are proper closed convex and the iterates follow the exact recurrence.

[F2]

PDHG one-step primal-dual gap telescope: for every test pair and N≥1, the sum of the first N saddle differences is at most the initial weighted squared distance.

[F3]

Saddle points of extended-real Lagrangians: Φ(x∗,y)≤Φ(x∗,y∗)≤Φ(x,y∗) for all x,y.

Proof

1.1A1F1givenalgebra

Every exact proximal output lies in the effective domain of its function. Convexity therefore puts xˉN in dom⁡f and yˉN in dom⁡g∗.

2.1A1F1F2step 1.1algebra

By convexity in [F1], f(xˉN)≤N−1∑k<Nf(xk+1) and g∗(yˉN)≤N−1∑k<Ng∗(yk+1); linearity gives KxˉN=N−1∑Kxk+1. Hence Φ(xˉN,y)−Φ(x,yˉN)≤1N∑k=0N−1(Φ(xk+1,y)−Φ(x,yk+1)). Apply [F2] and divide by N to get the bound.

3.1A1F3step 2.1∎

By the saddle inequalities [F3], Φ(xˉN,y∗)≥Φ(x∗,y∗) and Φ(x∗,yˉN)≤Φ(x∗,y∗), so their difference is nonnegative. Step 2.1 at (x∗,y∗) supplies the same O(1/N) upper bound. The ergodic estimate makes no claim about a single nonaveraged objective difference or pointwise iterate convergence.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

15 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources