The extended Smale's 9th problem -- On computational barriers and paradoxes in estimation, regularisation, computer-assisted proofs and learning
Linear and semidefinite programming (LP, SDP), regularisation through basis pursuit (BP) and Lasso have seen great success in mathematics, statistics, data science, computer-assisted proofs and learning. The success of LP is traditionally attributed to the fact that it is "in P" for rational inputs. On the other hand, in his list of problems for the 21st century S. Smale calls for "[Computational] models which process approximate inputs and which permit round-off computations". Indeed, since e.g. the exponential function does not have an exact representation or floating-point arithmetic approximates every rational number that is not in base-2, inexact input is a daily encounter. The model allowing inaccurate input of arbitrary precision, which we call the extended model, leads to extended versions of fundamental problems such as: "Are LP and other aforementioned problems in P?" The same question can be asked for an extended version of Smale's 9th problem on the list of mathematical problems for the 21st century: "Is there a polynomial time algorithm over the real numbers which decides the feasibility of the linear system of inequalities, and if so, outputs a feasible candidate?" One can thus pose this problem in the extended model. Similarly, the optimisation problems BP, SDP and Lasso, where the task is to output a solution to a specified precision, can likewise be posed in the extended model, also considering randomised algorithms. We will collectively refer to these problems as the extended Smale's 9th problem, which we settle in both the negative and the positive yielding two surprises: (1) In mathematics, sparse regularisation, statistics, and learning, one successfully computes with non-computable functions. (2) In order to mathematically characterise this phenomenon, one needs an intricate complexity theory for, seemingly paradoxically, non-computable functions.