Get our free extension to see links to code for papers anywhere online!

Chrome logo Add to Chrome

Firefox logo Add to Firefox

On Empirical Comparisons of Optimizers for Deep Learning

Oct 11, 2019
Dami Choi, Christopher J. Shallue, Zachary Nado, Jaehoon Lee, Chris J. Maddison, George E. Dahl

Share this with someone who'll enjoy it:

Selecting an optimizer is a central step in the contemporary deep learning pipeline. In this paper, we demonstrate the sensitivity of optimizer comparisons to the metaparameter tuning protocol. Our findings suggest that the metaparameter search space may be the single most important factor explaining the rankings obtained by recent empirical comparisons in the literature. In fact, we show that these results can be contradicted when metaparameter search spaces are changed. As tuning effort grows without bound, more general optimizers should never underperform the ones they can approximate (i.e., Adam should never perform worse than momentum), but recent attempts to compare optimizers either assume these inclusion relationships are not practically relevant or restrict the metaparameters in ways that break the inclusions. In our experiments, we find that inclusion relationships between optimizers matter in practice and always predict optimizer comparisons. In particular, we find that the popular adaptive gradient methods never underperform momentum or gradient descent. We also report practical tips around tuning often ignored metaparameters of adaptive gradient methods and raise concerns about fairly benchmarking optimizers for neural network training.

   Access Paper Source

Share this with someone who'll enjoy it: