mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Parameterized Complexity of Stationarity Testing for Piecewise-Affine Functions and Shallow CNN Losses

arXiv 2605.10219 ↗First posted 11 May 2026math.OC cs.CC cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We study the parameterized complexity of testing approximate first-order stationarity at a prescribed point for continuous piecewise-affine (PA) functions, a basic task in nonsmooth optimization. PA functions form a canonical model for nonsmooth stationarity testing and capture the local polyhedral geometry that appears in ReLU-type training losses. Recent work by Tian and So (SODA 2025) shows that testing approximate stationarity notions for PA functions is computationally intractable in the worst case, and identifies fixed-dimensional tractability as an open direction. We address this direction from the viewpoint of parameterized complexity, with the ambient dimension d as the parameter. In this paper, we give XP algorithms in fixed dimension for the tractable sides, and prove W[1]-hardness for the complementary sides. Moreover, lower bounds under the Exponential Time Hypothesis rule out algorithms running in time ρ(d)sizeo(d) for any computable function ρ, where size denotes the total binary encoding length of the stationarity-testing instance. As a further consequence, our results yield the corresponding parameterized complexity picture for testing local minimality of continuous PA functions. We further extend our hardness results to a family of shallow ReLU CNN training losses, with stationarity tested in the trainable weight space. Thus, the same parameterized-complexity picture also appears for simple CNN training losses.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 May 2026.

Builds on

18 of 40 references.

References · 18

  1. 2017Reluplex: An Efficient SMT Solver for Verifying Deep Neural Networkscited by 744
  2. 2014On the Number of Linear Regions of Deep Neural Networkscited by 381
  3. 2016Understanding Deep Neural Networks with Rectified Linear Unitscited by 257
  4. 2021Oracle Complexity in Nonsmooth Nonconvex Optimizationcited by 39
  5. 2021On the Finite-Time Complexity and Practical Computation of Approximate Stationarity Concepts of Lipschitz Functionscited by 31
  6. 2023Deterministic Nonsmooth Nonconvex Optimizationcited by 26
  7. 2023Training Neural Networks is NP-Hard in Fixed Dimensioncited by 23
  8. 2021The Computational Complexity of ReLU Network Training Parameterized by Data Dimensionalitycited by 22
  9. 2020Understanding Notions of Stationarity in Non-Smooth Optimizationcited by 18
  10. 2022No Dimension-Free Deterministic Algorithm Computes Approximate Stationarities of Lipschitzianscited by 16
  11. 2016Piecewise convexity of artificial neural networkscited by 7
  12. 2020On the complexity of finding a local minimizer of a quadratic function over a polytopecited by 7
6 more
  1. 2025The Computational Complexity of Counting Linear Regions in ReLU Neural Networkscited by 7
  2. 2025Parameterized Hardness of Zonotope Containment and Neural Network Verificationcited by 5
  3. 2018Efficiently testing local optimality and escaping saddles for ReLU networkscited by 4
  4. 2020Complexity aspects of local minima and related notionscited by 4
  5. 2025Testing Approximate Stationarity Concepts for Piecewise Affine Functionscited by 1
  6. 2025Subgradient Regularization: A Descent-Oriented Subgradient Method for Nonsmooth Optimizationcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.