Where Do Large Learning Rates Lead Us?
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2024
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866910677245886464 |
|---|---|
| author | Sadrtdinov, Ildus Kodryan, Maxim Pokonechny, Eduard Lobacheva, Ekaterina Vetrov, Dmitry |
| author_facet | Sadrtdinov, Ildus Kodryan, Maxim Pokonechny, Eduard Lobacheva, Ekaterina Vetrov, Dmitry |
| contents | It is generally accepted that starting neural networks training with large learning rates (LRs) improves generalization. Following a line of research devoted to understanding this effect, we conduct an empirical study in a controlled setting focusing on two questions: 1) how large an initial LR is required for obtaining optimal quality, and 2) what are the key differences between models trained with different LRs? We discover that only a narrow range of initial LRs slightly above the convergence threshold lead to optimal results after fine-tuning with a small LR or weight averaging. By studying the local geometry of reached minima, we observe that using LRs from this optimal range allows for the optimization to locate a basin that only contains high-quality minima. Additionally, we show that these initial LRs result in a sparse set of learned features, with a clear focus on those most relevant for the task. In contrast, starting training with too small LRs leads to unstable minima and attempts to learn all features simultaneously, resulting in poor generalization. Conversely, using initial LRs that are too large fails to detect a basin with good solutions and extract meaningful patterns from the data. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2410_22113 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Where Do Large Learning Rates Lead Us? Sadrtdinov, Ildus Kodryan, Maxim Pokonechny, Eduard Lobacheva, Ekaterina Vetrov, Dmitry Machine Learning It is generally accepted that starting neural networks training with large learning rates (LRs) improves generalization. Following a line of research devoted to understanding this effect, we conduct an empirical study in a controlled setting focusing on two questions: 1) how large an initial LR is required for obtaining optimal quality, and 2) what are the key differences between models trained with different LRs? We discover that only a narrow range of initial LRs slightly above the convergence threshold lead to optimal results after fine-tuning with a small LR or weight averaging. By studying the local geometry of reached minima, we observe that using LRs from this optimal range allows for the optimization to locate a basin that only contains high-quality minima. Additionally, we show that these initial LRs result in a sparse set of learned features, with a clear focus on those most relevant for the task. In contrast, starting training with too small LRs leads to unstable minima and attempts to learn all features simultaneously, resulting in poor generalization. Conversely, using initial LRs that are too large fails to detect a basin with good solutions and extract meaningful patterns from the data. |
| title | Where Do Large Learning Rates Lead Us? |
| topic | Machine Learning |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.22113 |