Riemannian Newton Methods with Statistical Inference
Authors: Xiaotian Chang, Qirui Hu, Yangdi Jiang, Nan Qiao
Organizations: Division of Mathematical Sciences, Nanyang Technological University. · School of Statistics and Data Science, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics. · School of Mathematics, Statistics and Mechanics, Beijing University of Technology, China.
We develop online statistical inference for Polyak-Ruppert averages of inexact Newton iterates on Riemannian manifolds. A local asymptotic representation separates observation noise, solver randomization, and accumulated implementation bias, and yields one-pass covariance estimators and asymptotically valid Wald regions under local regularity and centering conditions. Independent fresh solves add a positive semidefinite term to the score-sandwich covariance; averaging solver replicas reduces this term in inverse proportion to their number. Slowly varying predictable gains instead cancel from the first order law. Product torus simulations show how Newton scaling shortens an ill-conditioned transient and how retaining solver variation restores coverage. Intrinsic means and principal subspaces provide geometric applications, with a streaming data illustration.
Figures & tables
RSGD
Proposed, m=4
Exact Newton
κ
n
Cov. (%)
RMSE
Cov. (%)
RMSE
Cov. (%)
RMSE
1
256
95.8
18.99
95.2
21.00
95.8
18.99
1
1024
95.2
9.84
94.6
11.11
95.2
9.84
1
4096
96.2
4.63
94.4
5.38
96.2
4.63
30
256
75.4
29.60
96.4
21.60
96.6
18.85
30
1024
96.0
9.56
95.0
10.77
94.8
9.56
Table 1: Product torus comparison across spectral ratios and sample sizes. Coverage is for joint 95% Wald regions; geodesic RMSE is multiplied by 103 . Proposed uses m=4 independent coordinate solves. Every entry uses 500 paired replications; solver budgets and checkpoint errors are in the appendix.
κ
Method
25%
50%
100%
1
RSGD
9.35
6.57
4.63
Exact Newton
9.35
6.57
4.63
Proposed, m=4
10.86
7.57
5.38
30
RSGD
9.20
6.67
4.67
Exact Newton
8.80
6.51
4.66
Proposed, m=4
11.01
7.99
5.53
Table 2: Geodesic RMSE along the n=4096 averaging window, multiplied by 103 . The checkpoints contain 896, 1792 and 3584 retained observations after a burn-in of 512. Each row follows the same 500 paths with a fixed step constant; Proposed uses m=4 .
Coverage (%), m=1
RMSE ×103
κ
n
Direction
Score only
m=1
m=4
m=16
1
256
95.8
76.2
27.01
21.00
19.57
1
1024
93.0
75.2
14.01
11.11
10.16
1
4096
95.6
80.0
6.61
5.38
4.85
30
256
95.4
78.4
26.94
21.60
19.21
30
1024
95.4
78.6
13.40
10.77
9.86
Table 3: Solver covariance correction and replication. The two coverage columns use the same proposed estimator with m=1 : direction covariance versus the score only counterfactual that omits solver variation. Geodesic RMSEs for m∈{1,4,16} use 500 replications and are multiplied by 103 .
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Coverage (%)
RMSE ×103
n
Method
c
Cov.
Score
25%
50%
100%
256
RSGD
3.2
95.8
95.8
36.35
26.29
18.99
256
Exact Newton
3.2
95.8
95.8
36.35
26.29
18.99
256
Proposed, m=1
0.8
95.8
76.2
46.82
36.69
27.01
256
Proposed, m=4
1.6
95.2
91.6
39.29
29.49
21.00
256
Proposed, m=16
1.6
95.8
94.4
36.85
26.79
19.57
Appendix
Table 4: Complete product torus results at κ=1 . Cov. is implemented direction coverage for proposed and score-sandwich coverage for RSGD and exact Newton. Score is the score only counterfactual for the same estimate. All RMSEs are multiplied by 103 ; fractions refer to the retained averaging window. The constant c was selected before evaluation. Each row has 500 replications.
Coverage (%)
RMSE ×103
n
Method
c
Cov.
Score
25%
50%
100%
256
RSGD
1.6
75.4
75.4
87.75
52.02
29.60
256
Exact Newton
6.4
96.6
96.6
36.18
26.87
18.85
256
Proposed, m=1
0.8
95.4
78.4
46.75
36.03
26.94
256
Proposed, m=4
6.4
96.4
93.6
42.95
31.40
21.60
256
Proposed, m=16
6.4
98.4
97.4
37.41
27.80
19.21
Appendix
Table 5: Complete product torus results at κ=30 . Cov. is implemented direction coverage for proposed and score-sandwich coverage for RSGD and exact Newton. Score is the score only counterfactual for the same estimate. All RMSEs are multiplied by 103 ; fractions refer to the retained averaging window. The constant c was selected before evaluation. Each row has 500 replications.
Coverage (%)
RMSE ×103
n
Method
c
Cov.
Score
25%
50%
100%
256
RSGD
0.2
0.0
0.0
450.73
412.01
347.57
256
Exact Newton
3.2
95.8
95.8
35.90
25.89
18.88
256
Proposed, m=1
0.8
94.4
79.0
49.39
37.28
27.19
256
Proposed, m=4
0.8
95.4
92.6
36.57
27.67
20.68
256
Proposed, m=16
3.2
96.6
95.4
37.68
26.91
19.29
Appendix
Table 6: Complete product torus results at κ=300 . Cov. is implemented direction coverage for proposed and score-sandwich coverage for RSGD and exact Newton. Score is the score only counterfactual for the same estimate. All RMSEs are multiplied by 103 ; fractions refer to the retained averaging window. The constant c was selected before evaluation. Each row has 500 replications.
κ
n
RSGD
Exact Newton
Proposed, m=1
Proposed, m=4
Proposed, m=16
1
256
0.045
0.046
0.068
0.102
0.205
1
1024
0.182
0.180
0.257
0.407
0.799
1
4096
0.711
0.719
1.023
1.581
3.191
30
256
0.045
0.046
0.066
0.105
0.207
30
1024
0.176
0.177
0.262
0.403
0.803
30
4096
0.692
0.708
1.020
1.590
3.181
Appendix
Table 7: Product torus median serial time per complete path, in milliseconds. Medians are over 30 randomized-order blocks of 100 paths per cell. Timing includes observation generation and uses aggregated coordinate sketches.
Feature group
Projector mass
95% interval
Size (radius/perimeter/area)
0.392
[0.254, 0.530]
Boundary irregularity
0.455
[0.390, 0.521]
Texture
0.023
[0.005, 0.041]
Smoothness and symmetry
0.092
[0.041, 0.143]
Fractal dimension
0.038
[0.004, 0.071]
Appendix
Table 8: WDBC leading-projector mass by morphology-based feature group. Intervals are pointwise 95% delta-method intervals under the conditional working model.
We develop an online multiplier bootstrap for manifold-valued parameters estimated by averaging the iterates of Riemannian stochastic approximation. The method runs weighted iterations alongside the original algorithm, with each path using the same observations while updating its own state and intrinsic average. The weighted averages provide uncertainty assessments without a plug-in asymptotic covariance estimator. Under local stability and regularity conditions, we establish bootstrap consistency and show that a fixed number of paths suffices for asymptotically valid Student intervals and intrinsic confidence regions. The theory accommodates samplewise nonsmooth scores and identifies a critical oracle-bias regime in which the estimator's limiting distribution shifts, but the centered bootstrap distribution does not. Applications include spherical means, positive-definite matrix means and medians, and principal-subspace estimation. Simulations show coverage close to nominal in regular settings, and an analysis of North Atlantic storm locations illustrates descriptive online inference for a spherical center.
Xiaotian Chang, Qirui Hu, Yangdi Jiang +1
Division of Mathematical Sciences, Nanyang Technological University. · School of Statistics and Data Science, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics. · School of Mathematics, Statistics and Mechanics, Beijing University of Technology, China.
We study online inference for averaged Riemannian stochastic gradient descent (RSGD) when the unknown parameter lies on a manifold. Although the averaged RSGD iterate is asymptotically normal, practical inference requires estimating the unknown covariance operator in its limiting distribution. Existing online batch-means methods cannot be applied directly because a general Riemannian manifold lacks an addition operation, and the tangent space containing the Riemannian gradient varies across iterations. Through vector transport, we construct overlapping and non-overlapping covariance estimators that adaptively combine information from successive batches while accounting for the changing tangent spaces. The proposed estimators are online, require neither Riemannian Hessian computations nor a prespecified terminal sample size, and attain the same convergence rates as their Euclidean counterparts (Zhu et al., 2023). Together with asymptotic normality, these estimators enable online statistical inference for RSGD on manifolds. We illustrate the proposed framework through a detailed study of streaming principal component analysis on Grassmann manifolds.
Jingrong Guan, Liwei Jiang, Sen Na
Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Sciences, Northwestern University · Edwardson School of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University · School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology
We develop inference for manifold-valued population minimizers when each observation belongs to a different participant and only locally private messages reach the analyst. The method releases randomized tangent gradients and combines them through Riemannian stochastic approximation and Polyak-Ruppert averaging. Directly inserting a private data surrogate into a nonlinear loss can shift its population target, whereas conditional centring of the released gradient preserves the first-order equation. We introduce symmetric-pair regression (SPR) to estimate the asymptotic variance from the same private messages used for point estimation, without holding out participants or requesting a second release. We prove the central limit theorem and consistency of the fully transcript-based sandwich covariance and intrinsic Wald region under local differential privacy. Simulations across various statistical problems and manifolds support the predicted decrease in estimation error and near-nominal coverage under moderate privacy. An application to NHANES anthropometric data illustrates private estimation of a leading body-size direction and its uncertainty.
Xiaotian Chang, Yangdi Jiang, Qirui Hu
School of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Nanyang Technological University · School of Statistics and Data Science, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics.