Arc Gradient Descent: A Geometrically Motivated Gradient Descent-based Optimiser with Phase-Aware, User-Controlled Step Dynamics (proof-of-concept)
Fuente:
arXiv
Salvato in:
| Autori principali: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Preprint |
| Pubblicazione: |
2025
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1866912979715358720 |
|---|---|
| author | Verma, Nikhil Linnosmaa, Joonas Espinosa-Leal, Leonardo Vajragupta, Napat |
| author_facet | Verma, Nikhil Linnosmaa, Joonas Espinosa-Leal, Leonardo Vajragupta, Napat |
| contents | The paper presents the formulation, implementation, and evaluation of the ArcGD optimiser. The evaluation is conducted initially on a non-convex benchmark function and subsequently on a real-world ML dataset. The initial comparative study using the Adam optimiser is conducted on a stochastic variant of the highly non-convex and notoriously challenging Rosenbrock function, renowned for its narrow, curved valley, across dimensions ranging from 2D to 1000D and an extreme case of 50,000D. Two configurations were evaluated to eliminate learning-rate bias: (i) both using ArcGD's effective learning rate and (ii) both using Adam's default learning rate. ArcGD consistently outperformed Adam under the first setting and, although slower under the second, achieved superior final solutions in most cases. In the second evaluation, ArcGD is evaluated against state-of-the-art optimizers (Adam, AdamW, Lion, SGD) on the CIFAR-10 image classification dataset across 8 diverse MLP architectures ranging from 1 to 5 hidden layers. ArcGD achieved the highest average test accuracy (50.7%) at 20,000 iterations, outperforming AdamW (46.6%), Adam (46.8%), SGD (49.6%), and Lion (43.4%), winning or tying on 6 of 8 architectures. Notably, while Adam and AdamW showed strong early convergence at 5,000 iterations, but regressed with extended training, whereas ArcGD continued improving, demonstrating generalization and resistance to overfitting without requiring early stopping tuning. Strong performance on geometric stress tests and standard deep-learning benchmarks indicates broad applicability, highlighting the need for further exploration. Moreover, it is also shown that both a limiting variant of ArcGD and a momentum augmented ArcGD, recover sign-based momentum updates, revealing a clear conceptual link between ArcGD's phase structure and the core mechanism of the Lion Optimiser. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2512_06737 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Arc Gradient Descent: A Geometrically Motivated Gradient Descent-based Optimiser with Phase-Aware, User-Controlled Step Dynamics (proof-of-concept) Verma, Nikhil Linnosmaa, Joonas Espinosa-Leal, Leonardo Vajragupta, Napat Machine Learning Artificial Intelligence Computation and Language Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Neural and Evolutionary Computing The paper presents the formulation, implementation, and evaluation of the ArcGD optimiser. The evaluation is conducted initially on a non-convex benchmark function and subsequently on a real-world ML dataset. The initial comparative study using the Adam optimiser is conducted on a stochastic variant of the highly non-convex and notoriously challenging Rosenbrock function, renowned for its narrow, curved valley, across dimensions ranging from 2D to 1000D and an extreme case of 50,000D. Two configurations were evaluated to eliminate learning-rate bias: (i) both using ArcGD's effective learning rate and (ii) both using Adam's default learning rate. ArcGD consistently outperformed Adam under the first setting and, although slower under the second, achieved superior final solutions in most cases. In the second evaluation, ArcGD is evaluated against state-of-the-art optimizers (Adam, AdamW, Lion, SGD) on the CIFAR-10 image classification dataset across 8 diverse MLP architectures ranging from 1 to 5 hidden layers. ArcGD achieved the highest average test accuracy (50.7%) at 20,000 iterations, outperforming AdamW (46.6%), Adam (46.8%), SGD (49.6%), and Lion (43.4%), winning or tying on 6 of 8 architectures. Notably, while Adam and AdamW showed strong early convergence at 5,000 iterations, but regressed with extended training, whereas ArcGD continued improving, demonstrating generalization and resistance to overfitting without requiring early stopping tuning. Strong performance on geometric stress tests and standard deep-learning benchmarks indicates broad applicability, highlighting the need for further exploration. Moreover, it is also shown that both a limiting variant of ArcGD and a momentum augmented ArcGD, recover sign-based momentum updates, revealing a clear conceptual link between ArcGD's phase structure and the core mechanism of the Lion Optimiser. |
| title | Arc Gradient Descent: A Geometrically Motivated Gradient Descent-based Optimiser with Phase-Aware, User-Controlled Step Dynamics (proof-of-concept) |
| topic | Machine Learning Artificial Intelligence Computation and Language Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Neural and Evolutionary Computing |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.06737 |