ExpTest: Loss-Curve Hypothesis Testing for Autonomous Learning-Rate Selection in Deep Neural Networks

Training large neural networks with data-parallel stochastic gradient descent allocates N GPU replicas to compute effectively identical updates -- a practice that leaves the rich space of learning rate configurations entirely unexplored during training. We propose Hyperparameter-Divergent Ensemble Training (HDET), a method that repurposes these replicas for simultaneous learning rate exploration at negligible communication overhead. HDET operates in alternating phases: a fan-out stage in which replicas train independently under a structured, symmetric spread of learning rates, and a converge stage in which parameters are averaged across all replicas via AllReduce every T steps. Building on this ensemble substrate, we further propose an automatic learning rate (auto-LR) controller that treats the relative training loss across replicas as a performance signal, updating the shared base schedule toward higher-performing configurations via a momentum-based gradient-free meta-update. The combined method produces a self-adapting learning rate schedule that improves both optimization quality and generalization without additional hyperparameter sweeps or training budget. Crucially, the framework generalizes beyond learning rate: any scalar hyperparameter that does not alter model architecture -- such as dropout rate, attention scale temperature, or weight-decay coefficient -- can be explored across replicas using the same fan-out/converge protocol, with inter-replica loss differences serving as zero-order hypergradients that guide the search direction. HDET is implemented as a drop-in replacement for PyTorch's OneCycleLR scheduler, requiring no changes to model architecture, optimizer, or data pipeline.

We study optimal learning-rate selection in two-layer and three-layer linear neural networks trained to learn linear target functions. In particular, we derive the exact closed-form expressions for the gradients and test loss after one and two steps of gradient descent, enabling a precise characterization of early training dynamics. We characterize how learning rates should scale under the gradient approximation in the first two steps, and prove that performing updates with this approximation yields a tractable surrogate loss with a tight, small approximation error. This formulation enables the theoretical analysis of layer-wise learning rates and reveals a distinct early-training regime: test loss can be minimized by unequal learning rates at the initial step, while equal learning rates become optimal in subsequent steps. Our numerical experiments validate the theory and demonstrate the importance of balancing layer-wise learning rates early during training. The code is available at: https://github.com/TDCSZ327/Layer-Balancing.

The learning-rate schedule is a consequential choice in training deep networks, yet the policies in common use are heuristic, and published comparisons are hard to read, because architecture, dataset, and budget tend to vary alongside the schedule. We study BrachistoneLR, a schedule built by mapping the vertical coordinate of the brachistochrone, the curve of fastest descent under gravity, onto the range between a peak and a floor rate. Expanding the definition shows it to be cosine annealing with the half-period set to E - 1 instead of E, the configuration a standard implementation gives when its period argument is one less than the number of epochs. The rate therefore reaches its floor at the last epoch trained rather than one epoch later, and we show this difference decays as E^-2, making it a short-horizon effect. We then benchmark six schedules over 72 runs on three image classification datasets (MNIST, Fashion-MNIST, CIFAR-10) and four architecture families (fully connected, convolutional, recurrent, residual), fixing the optimizer, data pipeline, and evaluation protocol so that only the schedule varies. Schedules that fall smoothly from peak to floor beat the constant rate and calendar-based decay by margins that grow with task difficulty, reaching 2.5 points of dataset mean on CIFAR-10. Within that leading group, BrachistoneLR, cosine annealing, and warmup-cosine lie within 0.06 accuracy points and 0.17 of a mean rank, which one seed per configuration cannot separate. BrachistoneLR is best on both residual networks and has the highest CIFAR-10 mean, and it sets no milestones, decay factor, warmup length, or restart period. We conclude that the shape of a schedule matters more than its parameterization, that the choice of whether to use a smooth schedule matters more than the choice among them, and that the terminal-rate distinction is worth attention only over short horizons.