Many modern Language Model (LM) pipelines return an averaged model, such as an exponential moving average of the training iterates, rather than the final iterate itself. This raises a fundamental question: given that we will return an iterate average, how should we change training to improve the performance of this average? We study this question by formulating optimizer design for the iterate-average estimator as an optimal-control problem. In a continuous-time stochastic quadratic model, we solve for the control strategy that minimizes the error of the returned average subject to a penalty on the size of the intervention. A practical approximation to this controller yields PACE, a lightweight wrapper around AdamW that pulls the live weights toward their exponential moving average with a clipped, per-coordinate control strength. We prove that a stylized version of PACE converges at the standard stochastic convex optimization rate, up to a factor depending on the averaging rule, while in the quadratic setting it can strictly improve the limiting squared error of the iterate-average estimator and can do so by an arbitrarily large factor on some instances. Empirically, our results suggest that PACE improves over AdamW and EMA-evaluated AdamW in supervised fine-tuning of 1-2B parameter LMs and in GPT-2 pretraining on FineWeb for a wide range of learning rates, decay schedules, and other hyperparameters.

Human feedback plays a pivotal role in aligning large language models (LLMs) with human preferences. However, such feedback is often noisy or inconsistent, which can degrade the quality of reward models and hinder alignment. While various automated data cleaning methods have been proposed to mitigate this issue, a systematic evaluation of their effectiveness and generalizability remains lacking. To bridge this gap, we introduce the first comprehensive benchmark for evaluating 13 preference data cleaning methods in the context of LLM alignment. PrefCleanBench offers a standardized protocol to assess cleaning strategies in terms of alignment performance and generalizability across diverse datasets, model architectures, and optimization algorithms. By unifying disparate methods and rigorously comparing them, we uncover key factors that determine the success of data cleaning in alignment tasks. This benchmark lays the groundwork for principled and reproducible approaches to improving LLM alignment through better data quality--highlighting the crucial but underexplored role of data preprocessing in responsible AI development.

We introduce BikeBench, an engineering design benchmark for evaluating generative models on problems with multiple real-world objectives and constraints. As generative AI's reach continues to grow, evaluating its capability to understand physical laws, human guidelines, and hard constraints grows increasingly important. Engineering product design lies at the intersection of these difficult tasks, providing new challenges for AI capabilities. BikeBench evaluates AI models' capabilities to generate bicycle designs that not only resemble the dataset, but meet specific performance objectives and constraints. To do so, BikeBench quantifies a variety of human-centered and multiphysics performance characteristics, such as aerodynamics, ergonomics, structural mechanics, human-rated usability, and similarity to subjective text or image prompts. Supporting the benchmark are several datasets of simulation results, a dataset of 10,000 human-rated bicycle assessments, and a synthetically generated dataset of 1.6M designs, each with a parametric, CAD/XML, SVG, and PNG representation. BikeBench is uniquely configured to evaluate tabular generative models, large language models (LLMs), design optimization, and hybrid algorithms side-by-side. Our experiments indicate that LLMs and tabular generative models fall short of hybrid GenAI+optimization algorithms in design quality, constraint satisfaction, and similarity scores, suggesting significant room for improvement. We hope that BikeBench, a first-of-its-kind benchmark, will help catalyze progress in generative AI for constrained multi-objective engineering design problems.

Adversarial optimization algorithms that explicitly search for flaws in agents' policies have been successfully applied to finding robust and diverse policies in the context of multi-agent learning. However, the success of adversarial optimization has been largely limited to zero-sum settings because its naive application in cooperative settings leads to a critical failure mode: agents are irrationally incentivized to, blocking the completion of tasks and halting further learning. To address this, we introduce, a formalism for adversarial optimization that avoids self-sabotage by ensuring agents remain --that is, their policies are optimal with respect to some possible partner policy. To solve RPO, we develop, which trains agents to maximize their own reward in a modified version of the original game in which we use techniques to optimize the adversarial objective. RPG enables us to extend a variety of existing adversarial optimization algorithms that, no longer subject to the limitations of self-sabotage, can find adversarial examples, improve robustness and adaptability, and learn diverse policies. We empirically validate that our approach achieves strong performance in several popular cooperative and general-sum environments.

Understanding the dynamics of optimization algorithms in deep learning has become increasingly critical, especially as models grow in scale and complexity. Despite the empirical success of stochastic gradient descent (SGD) and its variants in finding solutions that generalize well, the precise mechanisms underlying this generalization remain poorly understood. A particularly intriguing aspect of this phenomenon is the bias of optimization algorithms towards certain types of minima--often flatter or simpler--especially in overparameterized regimes. While prior works have associated flatness of the loss landscape with better generalization, tools to mechanistically connect data, optimization algorithms, and the nature of the resulting minima are still limited. For instance, methods like Sharpness-Aware Minimization (SAM) have shown practical gains by explicitly promoting flatness, but lack a unified theoretical framework explaining their influence across different data structures and model architectures. In this work, we introduce a comprehensive linear stability analysis framework to dissect the behavior of optimization algorithms--SGD, random perturbations, and SAM--in neural networks, focusing particularly on two-layer ReLU models. Our approach is built upon a novel coherence measure that captures the interaction between data geometry and gradient similarity, providing new insights into why and how certain solutions are favored.

We study the optimization of non-convex functions that are not necessarily smooth (gradient and/or Hessian are Lipschitz) using first order methods. Smoothness is a restrictive assumption in machine learning in both theory and practice, motivating significant recent work on finding first order stationary points of functions satisfying generalizations of smoothness with first order methods. We develop a novel framework that lets us systematically study the convergence of a large class of first-order optimization algorithms (which we call decrease procedures) under generalizations of smoothness. We instantiate our framework to analyze the convergence of first order optimization algorithms to first and order stationary points under generalizations of smoothness. As a consequence, we establish the first convergence guarantees for first order methods to second order stationary points under generalizations of smoothness. We demonstrate that several canonical examples fall under our framework, and highlight practical implications.

Black-box variational inference (BBVI) is a methodology for posterior approximation that relies on stochastic optimization. In practice, the stochastic optimizers underpinning BBVI generally require extensive problem-specific tuning, which undermines its promise as a truly "black box" inference algorithm. However, over the past decade, many new adaptive stochastic optimization algorithms have been developed that reduce or remove entirely the need for tuning. In this work, we investigate this new collection of adaptive methods in the context of BBVI, with the goal of establishing the current state of the art in tuning-free optimization-based inference. In particular, we present a large-scale empirical evaluation of 56 stochastic gradient-based optimization algorithms applied to 1092 Bayesian inference optimization problems, involving over 550,000 individual optimization runs and 15 core-years of compute. The optimization algorithms we evaluate are chosen to represent a wide spectrum of recent approaches and the benchmark problems are chosen to span a range of difficulty, with posterior target dimension 1-10^4, condition number 1-10^8, and a range of variational families. Our results show that no single method dominates, but running a selection of 5 algorithms suffices to reliably get close to the best-possible observed performance. We thus provide a strong baseline for applications where expert tuning is not possible and for comparison when developing new stochastic optimization algorithms.

We consider function optimization as a sequential decision making problem under budget constraint. This constraint limits the number of objective function evaluations allowed during the optimization. We consider an algorithm inspired by a continuous version of a multi-armed bandit problem which attacks this optimization problem by solving the tradeoff between exploration (initial quasi-uniform search of the domain) and exploitation (local optimization around the potentially global maxima). We introduce the so-called Simultaneous Optimistic Optimization (SOO), a deterministic algorithm that works by domain partitioning. The benefit of such approach are the guarantees on the returned solution and the numerical efficiency of the algorithm. We present this machine learning approach to optimization, and provide the empirical assessment of SOO on the CEC'2014 competition on single objective real-parameter numerical optimization test-suite.

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

Contemporary advances in the field of deep learning have embarked upon an exploration of the underlying geometric properties of data, thus encouraging the investigation of techniques that consider general manifolds, for example, hyperbolic or orthogonal neural networks. However, the optimization algorithms for training such geometric deep models still remain highly under-explored. In this paper, we introduce Riemannian SAM by generalizing conventional Euclidean SAM to Riemannian manifolds. We successfully formulate the sharpness-aware minimization on Riemannian manifolds, leading to one of a novel instantiation, Lorentz SAM. In addition, SAM variants proposed in previous studies such as Fisher SAM can be derived as special examples under our Riemannian SAM framework. We provide the convergence analysis of Riemannian SAM under a less aggressively decaying ascent learning rate than Euclidean SAM. Our analysis serves as a theoretically sound contribution encompassing a diverse range of manifolds, also providing the guarantees for SAM variants such as Fisher SAM, whose convergence analyses are absent. Lastly, we illustrate the superiority of Riemannian SAM in terms of generalization over previous Riemannian optimization algorithms through experiments on knowledge graph completion and machine translation tasks.