arXiv Machine Learning By Chengkuo Bian, Pengcheng Xie

Why and When Neural Networks Improve Local Approximation in Optimization

Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →

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.

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 Machine Learning
Aug 4

When May a Model Replace the Experiment? Audits, Licenses, and the Price of Trust in Surrogate-Driven Design

arXiv:2608. 01378v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Design campaigns in chemistry, materials science, and machine learning share a bottleneck: determining how good a candidate truly is requires an expensive evaluation - an experiment, a first-principles simulation, or a full training run.

By Shuangxiu (Max), Ma (Zachary), Wenhe (Zachary), Zhao
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Aug 4

On the Implicit Flatness Bias of Sharpness-Aware Minimization: A Linear Stability Analysis with Quantitative Hyperparameter Bounds

Sharpness-Aware Minimization (SAM) improves generalization by seeking parameters whose loss is robust to local adversarial perturbations, but the quantitative mechanism underlying its implicit bias toward flat minima remains unclear. In particular, the perturbation radius $ρ$ is typically treated as an isolated tuning parameter, despite defining the neighborhood in which SAM measures sharpness.