[[["易于理解","easyToUnderstand","thumb-up"],["解决了我的问题","solvedMyProblem","thumb-up"],["其他","otherUp","thumb-up"]],[["没有我需要的信息","missingTheInformationINeed","thumb-down"],["太复杂/步骤太多","tooComplicatedTooManySteps","thumb-down"],["内容需要更新","outOfDate","thumb-down"],["翻译问题","translationIssue","thumb-down"],["示例/代码问题","samplesCodeIssue","thumb-down"],["其他","otherDown","thumb-down"]],["最后更新时间 (UTC):2025-07-27。"],[[["\u003cp\u003eEmploying a non-constant learning rate decay schedule, such as linear or cosine decay, is crucial for optimal model performance.\u003c/p\u003e\n"],["\u003cp\u003eComplicated, piece-wise learning rate schedules often arise from ad hoc tuning based on validation set performance and should be approached with caution due to reproducibility concerns.\u003c/p\u003e\n"],["\u003cp\u003ePrioritize tuning Adam's hyperparameters strategically: focus on the base learning rate for limited trials, gradually incorporating \u003ccode\u003ebeta_1\u003c/code\u003e, \u003ccode\u003eepsilon\u003c/code\u003e, and \u003ccode\u003ebeta_2\u003c/code\u003e with increasing trial budgets.\u003c/p\u003e\n"],["\u003cp\u003eWhile specific learning rate decay schedules are dataset and model dependent, having a schedule is more important than the specific type.\u003c/p\u003e\n"]]],[],null,["# Learning rate\n\nThis appendix contains a few additional details about learning rate.\n\nLearning rate decay schedule\n----------------------------\n\nThe best learning rate decay schedule family is an open problem;\nit's not clear how to construct a set of rigorous experiments to\nconfidently answer this question.\nAlthough we don't know the best schedule family, we're confident\nof the following:\n\n- It's important to have some (non-constant) schedule.\n- Tuning that schedule is important.\n\nDifferent learning rates work best at different times during the\noptimization process. Having some sort of schedule makes it more\nlikely for the model to hit a good learning rate.\n\n### Best default learning rate decay\n\nWe recommend either of the following learning rate decay families\nas a default:\n\n- Linear decay\n- Cosine decay\n\nMany other schedule families are probably good, too.\n\n### Why do some papers have complicated learning rate schedules?\n\nMany academic papers use complicated piece-wise learning rate (LR)\ndecay schedules. Readers often wonder how the authors arrived at\nsuch a complicated schedule. Many complicated LR decay schedules are\nthe result of tuning the schedule as a function of the validation set\nperformance in an ad hoc way. That is:\n\n1. Start a single training run with some simple LR decay (or a constant learning rate).\n2. Keep training running until the performance seems to stagnate. If this happens, pause training. Then, resume it with a perhaps steeper LR decay schedule (or smaller constant learning rate) from this point. Repeat this process (until the conference or launch deadline).\n\nBlithely copying the resulting schedule is generally not a good idea\nsince the best particular schedule is sensitive to a host of other\nhyperparameter choices. We recommend copying the algorithm that produced\nthe schedule, although this is rarely possible when arbitrary human\njudgment produced the schedule. This type of validation-error-sensitive\nschedule is fine to use if it can be fully automated, but\nhuman-in-the-loop schedules that are a function of validation error are\nbrittle and not easily reproducible, so we recommend avoiding them.\nBefore publishing results that used such a schedule, please try to make\nit fully reproducible.\n\n### How should Adam's hyperparameters be tuned?\n\nNot all the hyperparameters in Adam are equally important.\nThe following rules of thumb correspond to different \"budgets\" for the number\nof trials in a study.\n\n- If \\\u003c 10 trials in a study, only tune the (base) learning rate.\n- If 10-25 trials in a study, tune the learning rate and `beta_1`.\n- If 25+ trials, tune the learning rate, `beta_1`, and `epsilon`.\n- If substantially more than 25 trials, additionally tune tune `beta_2`.\n\nGiven how difficult it is to provide general rules about search spaces and\nhow many points you should sample from the search space, view the rules of\nthumb stated in this section as rough guidelines.\""]]