arXiv Machine Learning By Priya Kasimbeg (Alice), Ahmed Khaled (Alice), Aahlad Chandrabhatta (Alice), Yifan Wang (Alice), Andy Liu (Alice), Niccol\`o Ajroldi (Alice), David Tweedle (Alice), Xingyu (Alice), Yang, Isaac Patole, Frank Schneider, George E. Dahl

Towards Easier-to-Tune Training Algorithms: New Results from AlgoPerf

Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →

The paper reports on the updated AlgoPerf V1 benchmark, evaluating new training algorithms on wall‑clock time‑to‑target across nine workloads on fixed hardware. Using a self‑tuning ruleset that requires a single configuration for all workloads, Schedule‑Free AdamW achieved the best overall performance among 13 PyTorch and JAX submissions. The study also examines trade‑offs between step efficiency and runtime, finding that matrix‑preconditioned and two‑loop methods are sample‑efficient but need aggressive computational optimizations, and highlights the high sensitivity of learning rate and momentum across domains, underscoring the need for more robust hyperparameter‑tuning‑resistant methods.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.

arXiv AI
6d ago

Fantastic Pretraining Optimizers and Where to Find Them

The paper evaluates ten deep learning optimizers across models ranging from 0.1B to 1.2B parameters and varying data-to-model ratios, highlighting that fair comparisons require rigorous hyperparameter tuning and end-of-training evaluations. It finds that claimed speedups over AdamW are lower than advertised, dropping to only 1.1× for the largest models, and that intermediate checkpoint comparisons can mislead due to learning‑rate decay. The study shows that matrix‑based optimizers like Muon and Soap achieve the highest speedups, but these benefits diminish as model size increases.

By Kaiyue Wen, David Hall, Tengyu Ma, Percy Liang
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 11

ExpTest: Loss-Curve Hypothesis Testing for Autonomous Learning-Rate Selection in Deep Neural Networks

ExpTest is an autonomous learning‑rate controller that uses the training loss curve as an online signal to perform sequential statistical tests on theoretically motivated windows, detecting convergent behavior and triggering learning‑rate reductions. It combines a covariance‑based initial learning‑rate estimate, curvature‑motivated window sizing, and a two‑phase test‑driven decay, relying on the approximately exponential decay predicted under linearized network dynamics. Experiments on regression, classification, forecasting, and natural‑language tasks across various architectures show that ExpTest achieves competitive performance compared to hand‑tuned SGD baselines and recent learning‑rate‑free methods, without requiring manual initial learning‑rate selection or predefined scheduling.

By Zan Chaudhry, Naoko Mizuno
arXiv AI
Jun 15

Gefen: Optimized Stochastic Optimizer

arXiv:2606. 13894v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AdamW is a default optimizer for modern deep learning, but its first and second moment states add roughly two parameter-sized buffers to training memory.

By Nadav Benedek, Tomer Koren, Ohad Fried
arXiv Machine Learning
5d ago

Performance of Neural Operator Baselines on 'The Well' Dataset

The Well is a 15‑terabyte benchmark covering 16 physical simulation domains, aimed at evaluating machine learning surrogate models for complex systems. Baseline neural operator results were presented as illustrative, with minimal hyperparameter tuning and a strict 12‑hour per‑run limit. A brief hyperparameter search on the Tucker‑factorized Fourier Neural Operator, using only a single input timestep, lowered VRMSE below most published baselines on 15 of 17 tasks, showing that modest tuning can dramatically improve performance.

By Yash Pincha, Andy Dimnaku, Andrew Chiang, Adarsh Ganeshram, Valentin Duruisseaux, Anima Anandkumar
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 7

Optimizer Memory Schedules for Outscaling the Overtraining Axis

The paper studies how different optimizers perform as training duration (overtraining) increases, focusing on matrix‑preconditioned methods (Muon, SOAP) and a momentum‑scheduled method (ADANA) compared to AdamW. Across models ranging from 51M to 253M parameters and overtraining factors up to 256×, the authors find that optimal learning‑rate schedules, weight‑decay coefficients, and memory settings shift with horizon, and that ADANA consistently outperforms AdamW, especially with log‑time weight decay and momentum cooldown. Muon and SOAP maintain roughly constant token‑efficiency advantages, with SOAP potentially improving at the highest overtraining levels.

By Katie Everett, Shikai Qiu