One-Shot Localisation of the Global Minimum of a Noisy One-Dimensional Function: An Iterative Neural Minimizer Compared with Set Transformers and Classical Estimators
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We study a passive form of global optimisation: from twenty noisy samples of an unknown one-dimensional function, predict where its global minimum lies, with no further queries. We introduce the Neural Function Minimizer (NFM), an iterative model that walks a position across the domain and, at every step, reads the samples near that position and attends to all twenty of them, and we compare it with two Set Transformers of the same size trained on the same data, one that answers with a single point and one that answers with a mixture of candidate locations, and with classical zero-query estimators, over three training seeds per learned model. On held-out cases from the training families the three learned models are tied on location error, and each is more accurate on average than every classical estimator; against the Gaussian-process posterior argmin the NFM's error is lower by 1.3 points of the domain. The NFM has lower regret than the single-point Set Transformer, and its per-case uncertainty has a better likelihood than that model's and orders the cases by error better than the mixture model's. The Gaussian process and the mixture model have lower regret, and on functions outside the training families the Gaussian process is the most accurate estimator. Where two valleys are equally deep, the form of an estimator's answer, not its architecture, decides whether it commits to a valley or answers between them: every estimator that returns one point fitted to distance, learned or spline-based, hedges in a fifth to nearly a third of exact ties, while estimators that name a mode commit, and one Gaussian-process posterior does both, depending on whether it is summarised by its median or its mode. We will release the benchmark and a self-checking harness; its cases are identical on different machines and its results agree to rounding.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 54 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Apr 2026.
Builds on
23 of 54 references.
References · 23
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2016Layer Normalizationcited by 5,669
- 2017FiLM: Visual Reasoning with a General Conditioning Layercited by 2,333
- 2017Deep Setscited by 1,421
- 2021Deep Reinforcement Learning at the Edge of the Statistical Precipicecited by 807
- 2016Learning to learn by gradient descent by gradient descentcited by 620
- 2019Deep Equilibrium Modelscited by 615
- 2016Adaptive Computation Time for Recurrent Neural Networkscited by 506
- 2018Accurate Uncertainties for Deep Learning Using Calibrated Regressioncited by 422
- 2019Algorithm Unrolling: Interpretable, Efficient Deep Learning for Signal and Image Processingcited by 421
- 2021Transformers Can Do Bayesian Inferencecited by 360
- 2018Neural Processescited by 311
11 more
- 2020ReZero is All You Need: Fast Convergence at Large Depthcited by 264
- 2021Learning to Optimize: A Primer and A Benchmarkcited by 208
- 2021Accounting for Variance in Machine Learning Benchmarkscited by 201
- 2021PonderNet: Learning to Pondercited by 168
- 2022Transformer Neural Processes: Uncertainty-Aware Meta Learning Via Sequence Modelingcited by 127
- 2018Bias-Reduced Uncertainty Estimation for Deep Neural Classifierscited by 113
- 2019Evaluating and Calibrating Uncertainty Prediction in Regression Taskscited by 87
- 2022Tutorial on amortized optimizationcited by 83
- 2022Towards Learning Universal Hyperparameter Optimizers with Transformerscited by 81
- 2023PFNs4BO: In-Context Learning for Bayesian Optimizationcited by 73
- 2022Estimating the minimizer and the minimum value of a regression function under passive designcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.