Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper provides a computer-assisted counterexample disproving the conjecture that exhaustive AdaBoost always converges to a finite cycle. The counterexample leverages a block-product gadget with factors sharing a period-2 orbit but exhibiting irrational logarithmic ratios in their linearized return maps' dominant eigenvalues. Exact rational arithmetic is used to certify all assertions, ensuring the aperiodicity of the burst-winner sequence.
AdaBoost, a foundational boosting algorithm, can exhibit aperiodic behavior, settling a decade-old open question.
We give a computer-assisted counterexample to the open question, posed by Rudin, Schapire, and Daubechies in COLT 2012, of whether exhaustive AdaBoost always converges to a finite cycle. The construction is based on a block-product gadget whose two factors share an exact period-2 orbit for their 5-step branch maps, but whose linearized return maps have dominant eigenvalues with an irrational logarithmic ratio. This irrationality forces the burst-winner sequence to have an irrational asymptotic frequency, precluding eventual periodicity. All assertions are certified by exact rational arithmetic. This work was developed in collaboration with GPT-5.4 Pro and Claude Opus 4.6.