Risk Comparisons in Linear Regression: Implicit Regularization Dominates Explicit Regularization

Fuente: arXiv
Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Wu, Jingfeng, Bartlett, Peter L., Lee, Jason D., Kakade, Sham M., Yu, Bin
Format: Preprint
Veröffentlicht: 2025
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
_version_ 1866915506218336256
author Wu, Jingfeng
Bartlett, Peter L.
Lee, Jason D.
Kakade, Sham M.
Yu, Bin
author_facet Wu, Jingfeng
Bartlett, Peter L.
Lee, Jason D.
Kakade, Sham M.
Yu, Bin
contents Existing theory suggests that for linear regression problems categorized by capacity and source conditions, gradient descent (GD) is always minimax optimal, while both ridge regression and online stochastic gradient descent (SGD) are polynomially suboptimal for certain categories of such problems. Moving beyond minimax theory, this work provides instance-wise comparisons of the finite-sample risks for these algorithms on any well-specified linear regression problem. Our analysis yields three key findings. First, GD dominates ridge regression: with comparable regularization, the excess risk of GD is always within a constant factor of ridge, but ridge can be polynomially worse even when tuned optimally. Second, GD is incomparable with SGD. While it is known that for certain problems GD can be polynomially better than SGD, the reverse is also true: we construct problems, inspired by benign overfitting theory, where optimally stopped GD is polynomially worse. Finally, GD dominates SGD for a significant subclass of problems -- those with fast and continuously decaying covariance spectra -- which includes all problems satisfying the standard capacity condition.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2509_17251
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Risk Comparisons in Linear Regression: Implicit Regularization Dominates Explicit Regularization
Wu, Jingfeng
Bartlett, Peter L.
Lee, Jason D.
Kakade, Sham M.
Yu, Bin
Machine Learning
Existing theory suggests that for linear regression problems categorized by capacity and source conditions, gradient descent (GD) is always minimax optimal, while both ridge regression and online stochastic gradient descent (SGD) are polynomially suboptimal for certain categories of such problems. Moving beyond minimax theory, this work provides instance-wise comparisons of the finite-sample risks for these algorithms on any well-specified linear regression problem. Our analysis yields three key findings. First, GD dominates ridge regression: with comparable regularization, the excess risk of GD is always within a constant factor of ridge, but ridge can be polynomially worse even when tuned optimally. Second, GD is incomparable with SGD. While it is known that for certain problems GD can be polynomially better than SGD, the reverse is also true: we construct problems, inspired by benign overfitting theory, where optimally stopped GD is polynomially worse. Finally, GD dominates SGD for a significant subclass of problems -- those with fast and continuously decaying covariance spectra -- which includes all problems satisfying the standard capacity condition.
title Risk Comparisons in Linear Regression: Implicit Regularization Dominates Explicit Regularization
topic Machine Learning
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.17251