Layer normalization has demonstrated remarkable effectiveness at preventing plasticity loss in continual and reinforcement learning (RL), though the precise reasons for this effectiveness remain mysterious.

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/

Wecanseethis as the slope of the update function changes (middle row of Figure 1), these green lines correspond tothelocations givenbythearrowsinthetoprow.

Normalization layers have recently experienced a renaissance in the deep reinforcement learning and continual learning literature, with several works highlighting diverse benefits such as improving loss landscape conditioning and combatting overestimation bias. However, normalization brings with it a subtle but important side effect: an equivalence between growth in the norm of the network parameters and decay in the effective learning rate. This becomes problematic in continual learning settings, where the resulting learning rate schedule may decay to near zero too quickly relative to the timescale of the learning problem. We propose to make the learning rate schedule explicit with a simple re-parameterization which we call Normalize-and-Project (NaP), which couples the insertion of normalization layers with weight projection, ensuring that the effective learning rate remains constant throughout training. This technique reveals itself as a powerful analytical tool to better understand learning rate schedules in deep reinforcement learning, and as a means of improving robustness to nonstationarity in synthetic plasticity loss benchmarks along with both the single-task and sequential variants of the Arcade Learning Environment. We also show that our approach can be easily applied to popular architectures such as ResNets and transformers while recovering and in some cases even slightly improving the performance of the base model in common stationary benchmarks.

The Adam optimizer is a cornerstone of modern deep learning, yet the empirical necessity of each of its individual components is often taken for granted. This paper presents a focused investigation into the role of bias-correction, a feature whose contribution remains poorly understood. Through a series of systematic ablations on vision and language modelling tasks, we demonstrate that the conventional wisdom surrounding bias correction is misleading. In particular, we demonstrate that in the optimal hyper-parameter configuration, the inclusion of bias correction leads to no improvement in final test performance. Moreover, unless appropriate learning rate scheduling is implemented, the inclusion of bias correction can sometimes be detrimental to performance. We further reinterpret bias correction as a form of implicit learning rate scheduling whose behaviour is strongly dependent on the choice of smoothing hyper-parameters $β_1, β_2 \in [0,1)$. Our findings challenge the universal inclusion of this component.