Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This paper establishes rigorous theoretical bounds for the Adam optimizer in non-stationary environments, explicitly quantifying how adaptive preconditioning can degrade performance when objective drift dominates noise. The analysis reveals a critical tradeoff where vanilla SGD may outperform Adam under high-drift conditions, offering researchers actionable insights into hyperparameter selection ($\beta_1, \beta_2$) for dynamic tasks.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Adapt or Forget: Provable Tradeoffs Between Adam and SGD in Nonstationary Optimization

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2605.04269v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We provide a theoretical analysis of Adam under non-stationary stochastic objectives, separating two regimes: Euclidean tracking under adaptive strong monotonicity of the Adam-preconditioned mean-gradient operator, and high-probability projected stationarity guarantees under general $L$-smooth objectives. In the tracking regime, we derive finite-time expected and high-probability bounds that decompose sharply into four components: initialization, objective drift, a first-moment tracking error governed by $\beta_1$, and a preconditioner perturbation governed by $\beta_2$. We characterize the burn-in time required for the transient terms to decay to the asymptotic tracking bound under constant and step-decay schedules. We also prove a high-probability bound on the average projected stationarity gap for Adam under distribution shift. Across both analyses, our bounds reveal a noise--drift tradeoff: in noise-dominated regimes, first-moment averaging and adaptive preconditioning can yield favorable upper guarantees, whereas in drift-dominated regimes, stale first-moment information and preconditioner perturbations can enlarge Adam's tracking guarantee, potentially allowing vanilla SGD to attain a smaller tracking error. Our explicit $(\beta_1,\beta_2,\epsilon)$-dependent bounds identify mechanisms through which adaptive step-sizing can help or hurt under nonstationarity and provide theoretical explanations consistent with Adam's empirical instability and stabilization under distribution shift.

Abstract:We provide a theoretical analysis of Adam under non-stationary stochastic objectives, separating two regimes: Euclidean tracking under adaptive strong monotonicity of the Adam-preconditioned mean-gradient operator, and high-probability projected stationarity guarantees under general $L$-smooth objectives. In the tracking regime, we derive finite-time expected and high-probability bounds that decompose sharply into four components: initialization, objective drift, a first-moment tracking error governed by $\beta_1$, and a preconditioner perturbation governed by $\beta_2$. We characterize the burn-in time required for the transient terms to decay to the asymptotic tracking bound under constant and step-decay schedules. We also prove a high-probability bound on the average projected stationarity gap for Adam under distribution shift. Across both analyses, our bounds reveal a noise--drift tradeoff: in noise-dominated regimes, first-moment averaging and adaptive preconditioning can yield favorable upper guarantees, whereas in drift-dominated regimes, stale first-moment information and preconditioner perturbations can enlarge Adam's tracking guarantee, potentially allowing vanilla SGD to attain a smaller tracking error. Our explicit $(\beta_1,\beta_2,\epsilon)$-dependent bounds identify mechanisms through which adaptive step-sizing can help or hurt under nonstationarity and provide theoretical explanations consistent with Adam's empirical instability and stabilization under distribution shift.

Machine Learning (stat.ML); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2605.04269 [stat.ML]

(or arXiv:2605.04269v2 [stat.ML] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.04269 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 279 words

Related coverage