This paper studies several solution paths of sparse quadratic minimization problems as a function of the weighing parameter of the bi-objective of estimation loss versus solution sparsity. Three such paths are considered: the "L0-path" where the discontinuous L0-function provides the exact sparsity count; the "L1-path" where the L1-function provides a convex surrogate of sparsity count; and the "capped L1-path" where the nonconvex nondifferentiable capped L1-function aims to enhance the L1-approximation. Serving different purposes, each of these three formulations is different from each other, both analytically and computationally. Our results deepen the understanding of (old and new)properties of the associated paths, highlight the pros, cons, and tradeoffs of these sparse optimization models, and provide numerical evidence to support the practical superiority of the capped L1-path. Our study of the capped L1-path is the first of its kind as the path pertains to computable directionally stationary (= strongly locally minimizing in this context, as opposed to globally optimal) solutions of a parametric nonconvex nondifferentiable optimization problem. Motivated by classical parametric quadratic programming theory and reinforced by modern statistical learning studies, both casting an exponential perspective in fully describing such solution paths, we also aim to address the question of whether some of them can be fully traced in strongly polynomial time in the problem dimensions. A major conclusion of this paper is that a path of directional stationary solutions of the capped L1-regularized problem offers interesting theoretical properties and practical compromise between the L0-path and the L1-path. Indeed, while the L0-path is computationally prohibitive and greatly handicapped by the repeated solution of mixed integer nonlinear programs, the quality of L1-path, in terms of the two criteria---loss and sparsity--- in the estimation objective, is inferior to the capped L1-path; the latter can be obtained efficiently by a combination of a parametric pivoting-like scheme supplemented by an algorithm that takes advantage of the Z-matrix structure of the loss function.
Technical report, USC, September 2021
View Comparing Solution Paths of Sparse Quadratic Minimization with a Stieltjes Matrix