e-
>> From: r-help-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On
>> Behalf Of Prof. John C Nash
>> Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 5:55 PM
>> To: Bert Gunter
>> Cc: r-help@r-project.org
>> Subject: Re: [R] BFGS versus L-BFGS-B
>>
>&g
.org [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On
> Behalf Of Prof. John C Nash
> Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 5:55 PM
> To: Bert Gunter
> Cc: r-help@r-project.org
> Subject: Re: [R] BFGS versus L-BFGS-B
>
> For functions that have a reasonable structure i.e., 1 or at most a few
&
-2619
email: rvarad...@jhmi.edu
-Original Message-
From: r-help-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On
Behalf Of Prof. John C Nash
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 5:55 PM
To: Bert Gunter
Cc: r-help@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R] BFGS versus L-BFGS-B
For functions that
For functions that have a reasonable structure i.e., 1 or at most a few optima,
it is
certainly a sensible task. Separable functions are certainly nicer (10K 1D
minimizations),
but it is pretty easy to devise functions e.g., generalizations of Rosenbrock,
Chebyquad
and other functions that are h
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Brian Tsai wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Thanks so much for the informative reply! I'm currently trying to optimize
> ~10,000 parameters simultaneously - for some reason,
-- Some expert (Ravi, John ?) please correct me, but: Is the above not
complete nonsense? I can't i
formations is "better"
> and when. Another
> project, which I have made some tentative beginings to carry out.
> Collaborations welcome.
>
> Best,
>
> JN
>
>
> On 02/25/2011 06:00 AM, r-help-requ...@r-project.org wrote:
> > Message: 86
> > Date: Fr
I have made some tentative beginings to carry out.
Collaborations welcome.
Best,
JN
On 02/25/2011 06:00 AM, r-help-requ...@r-project.org wrote:
> Message: 86
> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:11:59 -0500
> From: Brian Tsai
> To: r-help@r-project.org
> Subject: [R] BFGS versus L-BFG
Brian Tsai gmail.com> writes:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm trying to figure out the effective differences between BFGS and L-BFGS-B
> are, besides the obvious that L-BFGS-B should be using a lot less memory,
> and the user can provide box constraints.
>
> 1) Why would you ever want to use BFGS, if L-BF
Hi all,
I'm trying to figure out the effective differences between BFGS and L-BFGS-B
are, besides the obvious that L-BFGS-B should be using a lot less memory,
and the user can provide box constraints.
1) Why would you ever want to use BFGS, if L-BFGS-B does the same thing but
use less memory?
2)
9 matches
Mail list logo