Beyond Averaging in John Ellipsoid Approximation: High-Accuracy Algorithms in the Leverage-Score Model

Abstract

The John ellipsoid of a symmetric polytope P=\x∈Rd:\|Ax\|∞1\, A∈Rn× d, is computed by a long line of leverage-score algorithms, from Cohen, Cousins, Lee and Yang (COLT 2019) to its successors [WY24, CLS+25], all reaching a (1+)-approximation in Θ(-1(n/d)) iterations. We separate this complexity into three costs the modern line conflates (certification, identification, and accuracy) and locate the historical -1 in the first alone. In the equivalent D-optimal-design form p∈Δn-(Σi piaiai), the leverage-score oracle is exactly the first-order oracle and the (1+)-John guarantee the Frank-Wolfe gap g(p) d; through this dictionary the costs come apart. The -1 is a certification artifact: the uniform average of the iterates, the certificate used throughout the line, has gap exactly Θ(1/T), however cheap each iteration is made. Pointed instead at the last iterate the same oracle is fast: a warm-started accelerated method reaches the guarantee in C(A)+O(κ(1/)) queries after an -independent setup C(A), and once the optimal face is identified the facial problem is an unconstrained self-concordant minimization whose Hessian the oracle recovers exactly, so damped Newton needs only O((1/)) steps, for a total of C(A)+O(d2(1/)) queries. The accuracy dependence is thus doubly logarithmic after an -independent, condition-dependent setup; the open problem is the remaining identification cost (a condition-free bound on reaching the optimal face) and lower bounds. Accuracy is not the obstruction.

0

Turn this paper into a lesson

ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…