arXiv:2610.00403v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Optimizers can fit the same task while acquiring different generalizing relations. We study the training conditions governing these differences in...
By Gongyue Zhang, Honghai Liu
arXiv:2606. 03938v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-epoch training is becoming the standard now that compute is growing faster than the supply of high-quality text.
By Bishwas Mandal, Shmuel Berman, Akshay Vegesna, Samip Dahal
The paper investigates two strategies for improving large language model (LLM) evaluation: specialized judge weights and rule‑based deferral policies. Experiments on nearly 100,000 rubric‑conditioned samples show that correct rubrics boost accuracy, while incorrect ones hurt it, and that splitting training data into criterion‑specific experts can severely degrade performance unless the experts are warm‑started from a unified model. The authors demonstrate that lightweight deferral cascades can match or exceed the accuracy of larger standalone judges at a fraction of the compute cost, and they provide practical design rules for building efficient, reliable LLM evaluators.
By Ye Chen, Weining Zhang
The article surveys recent neural‑network optimizers, noting that the field has moved beyond simple Adam variants to encompass matrix‑ and layer‑level designs, time‑policy horizons, and state representations that survive sharding and low‑precision computation. It categorizes optimizers along four axes—temporal estimation, update geometry, horizon management, and representation & systems—highlighting methods such as Muon, Shampoo, SOAP, and quantized states. The survey concludes that while matrix‑aware methods are a genuine advance, no single optimizer universally replaces AdamW, and performance depends on model scale, data‑to‑parameter ratio, batch size, schedule, partitioning, tuning budget, and target metric.
By Ruoran Xu
arXiv:2607. 06772v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Learned optimization aims to improve upon hand-designed optimizers (e.
By Xiaolong Huang, Benjamin Th\'erien, James Harrison, Eugene Belilovsky
The paper investigates why neural network surrogates sometimes improve and sometimes worsen derivative‑free optimisation performance. It identifies three key factors—role (whether the surrogate proposes candidates or replaces gradients), radius (the neighbourhood within which a local model is reliable), and room (whether the base method can still progress)—that determine when a learned local model is beneficial. Experiments on 117 benchmark instances show that providing surrogate‑approved candidates boosts success rates, while replacing gradients or ignoring the radius can reduce them.
By Chengkuo Bian, Pengcheng Xie