aiqbench analysis
This research addresses the scalability bottleneck of the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm by evaluating subspace variants like KSLM and HSLM against standard first-order optimizers such as Adam. The study provides a comparative analysis of convergence speed and computational efficiency for regression and classification tasks, offering insights into when second-order methods remain viable for large-scale neural network training.
Subspace Levenberg Marquardt Algorithms in Training Neural Networks
arXiv:2609.00789v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The Levenberg-Marquardt (LM) algorithm is a well-known second-order method for rapid convergence and strong robustness when training small- to medium-sized neural networks (NNs). However, its computational and memory costs increase significantly as the number of parameters in an NN grows. To address this limitation, subspace methods have been proposed, such as the Krylov subspace LM (KSLM) and the hybrid subspace LM (HSLM), making second-order algorithms more efficient. In this work, we evaluate the subspace Levenberg-Marquardt algorithms for regression and classification tasks in neural networks. We compare the performance of subspace LM variants with the classical LM method, as well as other popular first-order algorithms, such as stochastic gradient descent (SGD) and Adam.
Abstract:The Levenberg-Marquardt (LM) algorithm is a well-known second-order method for rapid convergence and strong robustness when training small- to medium-sized neural networks (NNs). However, its computational and memory costs increase significantly as the number of parameters in an NN grows. To address this limitation, subspace methods have been proposed, such as the Krylov subspace LM (KSLM) and the hybrid subspace LM (HSLM), making second-order algorithms more efficient. In this work, we evaluate the subspace Levenberg-Marquardt algorithms for regression and classification tasks in neural networks. We compare the performance of subspace LM variants with the classical LM method, as well as other popular first-order algorithms, such as stochastic gradient descent (SGD) and Adam.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Optimization and Control (math.OC)
arXiv:2609.00789 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2609.00789v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.00789 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
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 · 210 words
Related coverage
Adaptive Hybrid Subspace Levenberg Marquardt Algorithm with Adequacy Monitor for Large Scale Least Squares Problems
arXiv · Aug 27, 2026
Do physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) need to be deep? Shallow PINNs using the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm
arXiv · Aug 26, 2026
\L{}ukasiewicz Neural Networks Extended: Residual Architectures and Crystallization Strategies for Interpretable Rule Extraction
arXiv · Sep 30, 2026
Alternating Levenberg-Marquardt Training of Physics-Informed Neural Networks with Fourier-Enhanced Features
arXiv · Aug 7, 2026