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.
Hypergradient of a smooth local stationary branch
Statement
Let , let and be open, and let be and be . Here means total differentiability with continuous derivative, and means the derivative map is . Define , , and . Suppose and is invertible. Then there are open neighborhoods and of and and a unique local stationary branch through , meaning and for every . After shrinking if necessary, is invertible and
Write . For , where holds fixed and gradients are column vectors, the hypergradient is
The local branch need not be a global inner optimizer. In the separate global regime where, for every , is defined on all of and, for some , satisfies for every , each stationary point is the unique global minimizer.
Statement references
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Open parameter and state domains, the inner objective, the outer objective, a stationary point , and an invertible inner Hessian at that point.
Smooth bilevel stationary problems and their hypergradients: is the inner stationarity residual, , , and the local outer objective is .
The Euclidean implicit function theorem with derivative formula: for a residual with zero value and invertible state-block derivative, there are neighborhoods with a unique solution branch.
The Euclidean implicit function theorem with derivative formula: after shrinking the neighborhoods, the state-block derivative stays invertible along the branch and its derivative is minus the inverse state Jacobian times the parameter Jacobian.
The chain rule for total derivatives: : the derivative of a composition of finite-dimensional totally differentiable maps is the composition of their derivatives.
Proof
Put . Since is , this residual is on the open product domain; it vanishes at and its state derivative is the invertible matrix . Applying [F2] gives open neighborhoods and a unique local branch through that point.
The derivative clause of [L1], evaluated along this branch after shrinking its parameter neighborhood, gives .
The map is , so [F3] applied to and this map yields .
Substitute step 2.1 into step 2.2 and use . This is the asserted column-gradient hypergradient formula.
In the stated global regime, fix any and any stationary point , so . For every , the strong-convexity inequality gives . Thus this arbitrary stationary point is the unique global minimizer, proving the claim for every stationary point wherever the global regime holds.
Depends on
Used by
- A scalar ridge penalty and its validation hypergradient Example
- A singular Hessian leaves the minimizing branch undetermined Example
- An exact primal state can have a wrong finite-unroll derivative Example
- Exact stationary sensitivities and finite training derivatives are different Remark
- Residual bounds for exact and approximate-state adjoint hypergradients Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
12 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
- Stephen Gould et al., On Differentiating Parameterized Argmin and Argmax Problems with Application to Bi-level Optimization, §3 (standard reference, not scraped)
- MIT OpenCourseWare 18.S096, Matrix Calculus for Machine Learning and Beyond, Lecture 4 Part 2, §6.3.1 (standard reference, not scraped)
- J. Lebl, Basic Analysis II, §8.5.1, Theorem 8.5.6 and proof (standard reference, not scraped)