Skip to main content
Log in

A unified algorithm for mixed \(l_{2,p}\)-minimizations and its application in feature selection

  • Published:
Computational Optimization and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recently, matrix norm \(l_{2,1}\) has been widely applied to feature selection in many areas such as computer vision, pattern recognition, biological study and etc. As an extension of \(l_1\) norm, \(l_{2,1}\) matrix norm is often used to find jointly sparse solution. Actually, computational studies have showed that the solution of \(l_p\)-minimization (\(0<p<1\)) is sparser than that of \(l_1\)-minimization. The generalized \(l_{2,p}\)-minimization (\(p\in (0,1]\)) is naturally expected to have better sparsity than \(l_{2,1}\)-minimization. This paper presents a type of models based on \(l_{2,p}\ (p\in (0, 1])\) matrix norm which is non-convex and non-Lipschitz continuous optimization problem when \(p\) is fractional (\(0<p<1\)). For all \(p\) in \((0, 1]\), a unified algorithm is proposed to solve the \(l_{2,p}\)-minimization and the convergence is also uniformly demonstrated. In the practical implementation of algorithm, a gradient projection technique is utilized to reduce the computational cost. Typically different \(l_{2,p}\ (p\in (0,1])\) are applied to select features in computational biology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _{2,p}\) (\(0<p<1\)) is not a valid matrix norm because it does not admit the triangular inequality. Here we call it matrix norm for convenience.

References

  1. Nie, F.P., Huang, H., Cai, X., and Ding, C.: Efficient and robust feature selection via joint \(l_{2,1}\)-norms minimization. Twenty-Fourth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 1–9. (2010)

  2. Candès, Emmanuel J., Wakin, Michael B., Boyd, Stephen P.: Enhancing sparsity by reweighed \(l_1\) minimization. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 14(5), 877–905 (2008)

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Chartrand, R.: Exact reconstructions of sparse signals via nonconvex minimization. IEEE Signal Process. Lett. 14(10), 707–710 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chartrand, R., and Yin, W.: Iteratively reweighed algorithms for compressive sensing. 33rd International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, pp. 3869–3872 ( 2008)

  5. Chen, X.J., Xu, F.M., Ye, Y.Y.: Lower bound theory of nonzero entries in solutions of \(l_2-l_p\) minimization. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 32(5), 2832–2852 (2010)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Ding, C., Zhou, D., He, X.F., and Zha, H.Y.: \(R1-\)PCA: Rotational invariant \(L_1-\)norm principal component analysis for robust subspace factorization. Proceedings of the 23th International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 281–288 (2006)

  7. Dudoit, S., Fridly, J., Speed, T.P.: Comparison of discrimination methods for the classification of tumors using gene expression data. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 97(457), 77–87 (2002)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Golub, T.R., Slonim, D.K., Tamayo, P., Huard, C., Gaasenbeek, M., Mesirov, J.P., Coller, H., Loh, M.L., Downing, J.R., Caligiuri, M.A., Bloomfield, C.D., Lander, E.S.: Molecular classification of cancer: class discovery and class prediction by gene expression monitoring. Science 286(5439), 531–537 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Nutt, C.L., Mani, D.R., Betensky, R.A., Tamayo, P., Caincross, J.G., Ladd, C., Pohl, U., Hartmann, C., Mclaughlin, M.E.: Gene expression-based classification of malignant gliomas correlates better with servival than histological classification. Cancer Res. 63, 1602–1607 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gordon, G.J., Jensen, R.V., Hsiao, L.L., Gullans, S.R., Blumenstock, J.E., Ramaswamy, S., Richards, W.G., Sugarbaker, D.J., Bueno, R.: Translation of microarray data into clinically relevant cancer diagnoistic tests using gene expression ratios in lung cancer and mesothelioma. Cancer Res. 62(17), 4963–4967 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Singh, D., Febbo, P.G., Ross, K., Jackson, D.G., Manola, J., Ladd, C., Tamayo, P., Renshaw, A.A., D’Amico, A.V., Richie, J.P., Lander, E.S., Loda, M., Kantoff, P.W., Golub, T.R., Sellers, W.R.: Gene expression correlates of clinical prostate cancer behavior. Cancer Cell 1(2), 203–209 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Xu, Z.B., Zhang, H., Wang, Y., Chang, X.Y., Yong, L.: \(L_{\frac{1}{2}}\) regularizer. Sci. China 52(6), 1159–1169 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rakotomamonjy, A., Flamary, R., Gasso, G., Canu, S.: \(l_p-l_q\) Penalty for sparse linear and sparse multiple kernel multitask learning. IEEE Transac. Neural Netw. 22(8), 1307–1320 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Rosen, J.B.: The gradient projection method for nonlinear programming. Part 1 Linear constraints. J. SIAM 8, 181–217 (1960)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The first author thanks Dr. Zhang Hongchao for his helpful suggestions on this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Songcan Chen.

Additional information

The work is supported by the NSFC11001128, NSFC61035003, NSFC61170151, NSFC11071117 and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. NZ2013306 and NZ2013211).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wang, L., Chen, S. & Wang, Y. A unified algorithm for mixed \(l_{2,p}\)-minimizations and its application in feature selection. Comput Optim Appl 58, 409–421 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10589-014-9648-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10589-014-9648-x

Keywords

Navigation