Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
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.

Momentum and quadratic acceleration — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Logical flowchart

3 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

4 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedOpen item page →

An untuned heavy-ball recurrence diverges on a scalar quadratic

Example

Let F:R→R be F(x)=12x2. Run heavy-ball momentum with α=278, β=14, and w0=w1=1. For every integer t≥0, the resulting iterates are

wt=−35(−2)t+85(−18)t,

so the iterate sequence is unbounded and does not converge to a real limit.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: F(x)=12x2, heavy-ball parameters α=278 and β=14, and initial values w0=w1=1.

[F1]

Heavy-ball momentum: for fixed parameters, wt+1=wt−α∇F(wt)+β(wt−wt−1).

[F2]

Matrix quadratic forms have the expected first derivative and Hessian: for q(x)=12∥Cx∥22, the gradient is C∗Cx.

[F3]

The reals are complete: with its usual order and field structure, R is a complete ordered field.

[F4]

Every complete ordered field is Archimedean: in every complete ordered field, for every element M there is a canonical natural number n≥1 whose field embedding satisfies M<n.

Verification

1.1givenF1F2algebra

Taking C=[1] in [F2] gives ∇F(x)=x. Substituting the parameters and this gradient into [F1] yields wt+1=−178wt−14wt−1 for every t≥1.

2.1givenstep 1.1algebrainduction

The characteristic polynomial is r2+178r+14=(r+2)(r+18). Each geometric sequence (−2)t and (−18)t therefore satisfies the recurrence in step 1.1. The stated linear combination has w0=1 and w1=65−15=1, so the recurrence and these initial values prove the displayed formula for all t by induction.

3.1givenF3F4step 2.1algebrainduction∎

For t≥1, factor the expression as wt=(−2)t(−35+85 16−t). Since 16−t≤1/16, the term in parentheses is at most −12, hence ∣wt∣≥2t−1. Induction gives 2t−1≥t for t≥1. For any starting index N≥1 and any real R>0, put B=max⁡{N,R}; since R is a complete ordered field by [F3], [F4] supplies a natural number t>B, which we use under the usual embedding as an integer iteration index. Thus t≥N and ∣wt∣≥t>R. Every tail is therefore unbounded. If the sequence converged to a real ℓ, some tail would satisfy ∣wt−ℓ∣<1 and hence ∣wt∣<∣ℓ∣+1, a contradiction.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: Not suppliedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

A reported stochastic Nesterov experiment is empirical evidence

Example

Sutskever, Martens, Dahl, and Hinton report experiments on the Curves, MNIST, and Faces deep-autoencoder tasks using sigmoid networks, their sparse initialization, 750,000 parameter updates per trial, minibatches of size 200, and no regularization. They used a slowly increasing momentum schedule capped by μmax⁡ and selected the best training learning rate for each schedule from {0.05,0.01,0.005,0.001,0.0005,0.0001}. In Table 1, the Curves training squared error is 0.074 for their Nesterov variant with μmax⁡=0.999 and 0.48 for the zero-momentum SGD baseline. The paper reports training errors only; this setup-specific empirical comparison supplies no general stochastic convergence rate or test-risk guarantee.

Example references

Nesterov accelerated gradient algorithm The deterministic algorithm evaluates the gradient at the look-ahead point; the reported experiment replaces the full gradient by a minibatch gradient.

Sutskever, Martens, Dahl, and Hinton, On the Importance of Initialization and Momentum in Deep Learning

Bottou, Curtis, and Nocedal, Optimization Methods for Large-Scale Machine Learning

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

The spectrum 1, 4, 9 gives tuned root factor one half

Example

Let A=diag⁡(1,4,9), F(w)=12wTAw on R3, and w0=w1=(1,1,1). With c=1 and L=9, tuned heavy-ball has α=14, β=14, and modal root factor 12 at all three eigenvalues. Its endpoint characteristic polynomials are repeated-root polynomials. Gradient descent with step γ=15 has modal multipliers 45,15,−45, so its worst modal factor is 45.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The diagonal matrix A=diag⁡(1,4,9), objective F(w)=12wTAw, initial vector w0=w1=(1,1,1), and the two fixed-step update rules.

[F1]

Tuned heavy-ball has the minimax root factor on positive-definite quadratics: for c=1, L=9, the tuned parameters are α=4/(L+c)2 and β=((L−c)/(L+c))2, with modal root factor q=(L−c)/(L+c).

[F2]

Heavy-ball momentum: the update is wt+1=wt−α∇F(wt)+β(wt−wt−1).

[F3]

Gradient descent: in fixed-step mode, the update is x↦x−γ∇F(x).

[F4]

Matrix quadratic forms have the expected first derivative and Hessian: for q(x)=12∥Cx∥22, the gradient is C∗Cx.

Verification

1.1givenF1algebra

The eigenvalues of A are 1,4,9, so c=1, L=9, κ=9, and q=(3−1)/(3+1)=1/2. Substitution into [F1] gives α=4/(3+1)2=1/4 and β=q2=1/4.

1.2givenF2F4algebra

Taking C=diag⁡(1,2,3) gives CTC=A, so [F4] yields ∇F(w)=Aw. Projecting [F2]'s update onto each standard coordinate gives polynomial pλ(r)=r2−(1+β−αλ)r+β. For λ=1 it is r2−r+1/4=(r−1/2)2; for λ=4 it is r2−r/4+1/4, whose roots are 1/8±i15/8 and have modulus 1/2; for λ=9 it is r2+r+1/4=(r+1/2)2. Thus each root factor is 1/2, and the endpoint roots are repeated.

2.1givenF3algebra∎

By [F3], gradient descent with γ=1/5 has multiplier 1−λ/5 on an eigenvector of eigenvalue λ. The multipliers at 1,4,9 are 4/5,1/5,−4/5, whose largest absolute value is 4/5.

Sources