cs.LGMay 21, 2026

One LR Doesn't Fit All: Heavy-Tail Guided Layerwise Learning Rates for LLMs

Authors: Di HeSongjun TuKeyu WangLu YinShiwei Liu

Abstract

Learning rate configuration is a fundamental aspect of modern deep learning. The prevailing practice of applying a uniform learning rate across all layers overlooks the structural heterogeneity of Transformers, potentially limiting their effectiveness as the backbone of Large Language Models (LLMs). In this paper, we introduce Layerwise Learning Rate (LLR), an adaptive scheme that assigns distinct learning rates to individual Transformer layers. Our method is grounded in Heavy-Tailed Self-Regularization (HT-SR) theory, which characterizes the empirical spectral density (ESD) of weight correlation matrices to quantify heavy-tailedness. Layers with weaker heavy-tailedness are assigned larger learning rates to accelerate training, while layers with stronger heavy-tailedness receive smaller learning rates. By tailoring learning rates in this manner, LLR promotes more balanced training across layers, leading to faster convergence and improved generalization. Extensive experiments across architectures ranging from LLaMA to GPT-nano, optimizers including AdamW and Muon, and model scales from 60M to 3B parameters with up to 100B training tokens demonstrate the effectiveness of LLR. LLR achieves up to 1.5x training speedup and consistently outperforms uniform-learning-rate baselines. In particular, it improves the average zero-shot accuracy of 1B models from 47.09% to 49.02%, and that of 3B models from 48.58% to 50.61%. A key advantage of LLR is its low tuning overhead: it can transfer nearly optimal learning-rate settings directly from the uniform baseline. Code is available at https://github.com/hed-ucas/Layer-wise-Learning-Rate.

Explore similar work

Jun 28, 2026cs.LG

On the Nonlinearity of Learning Rate Scaling for LLM Training

Learning-rate transfer can reduce the cost of training large language models: instead of sweeping learning rates at target scale, practitioners extrapolate from smaller runs. Existing approaches often assume that the optimal learning rate follows a log-linear scaling law in data scale and model size. We carefully examine and evaluate this scaling law. In our empirical study of GPT-2--style models from 22M to 707M parameters trained on 5B to 100B tokens, the optimal learning rate develops upward curvature at larger scales, leading to inaccurate extrapolation. We find that this curvature largely disappears when learning rates are replaced by effective learning rate (the step size in normalized weight space), and when data DD extrapolation is used instead of model size NN extrapolation. Next, we explain nonlinearity in scaling: weight-norm converges to equilibrium slower when optimal learning is small, requiring a larger step size to reduce the transient phase. Experiments with AdamH, which directly controls the effective learning rate, further support this explanation.
Zaiwen Yang, Huaqing Zhang, Jing Xu +1
May 20, 2026cs.LG

Quantifying Hyperparameter Transfer and the Importance of Embedding Layer Learning Rate

Hyperparameter transfer allows extrapolating optimal optimization hyperparameters from small to large scales, making it critical for training large language models (LLMs). This is done either by fitting a scaling law to the hyperparameters or by a judicious choice of parameterization, such as Maximal Update (μμP), that renders optimal hyperparameters approximately scale invariant. In this paper, we first develop a framework to quantify hyperparameter transfer through three metrics: (1) the quality of the scaling law fit, (2) the robustness to extrapolation errors, and (3) the asymptotic loss penalty due to choice of parameterization. Next, we investigate through a comprehensive series of ablations why μμP appears to offer high-quality learning rate transfer relative to standard parameterization (SP), as existing theory is inadequate. We find that the overwhelming benefit of μμP relative to SP when training with AdamW arises simply from maximizing the learning rate of the embedding layer. In SP, the embedding layer learning rate acts as a bottleneck that induces training instabilities; increasing it by a factor of width to match μμP dramatically smooths out training while improving hyperparameter transfer. We also find that weight decay improves the scaling law fits, while, in the fixed token-per-parameter setting, it hurts the robustness of the extrapolation.
Dayal Singh Kalra, Maissam Barkeshli
Apr 30, 2026cs.AI

Learning Rate Engineering: From Coarse Single Parameter to Layered Evolution

Learning rate scheduling has evolved from the single global fixed rate of early SGD to sophisticated layer-wise adaptive strategies. We systematize this evolution into five generations: (Gen1) global fixed learning rates, (Gen2) global scheduling, (Gen3) parameter-level adaptation, (Gen4) layer-level differentiation, and (Gen5) joint layer-time scheduling. We trace the fundamental motivation behind each transition, showing how the shift from one-size-fits-all to tailoring by layer and time addresses the impossible trinity of transfer learning: lower layers require small updates to preserve general knowledge while higher layers need large updates to adapt to new tasks. Building on this taxonomy, we propose Discriminative Adaptive Layer Scaling (DALS), a unified framework that integrates phase-adaptive cosine scheduling, depth-aware Grokfast gradient filtering, and LARS-style trust ratios into a single coherent optimizer. We benchmark 18 strategies including three DALS variants across all five generations on five datasets: synthetic, CIFAR-10 (from scratch), RTE, TREC-6, and IMDb (fine-tuning). On synthetic, DALS achieves the best accuracy at 98.0%, while DALS-Fast reaches 90% in just 3 epochs. The cross-dataset analysis reveals striking regime-dependent patterns -- no single strategy wins across all regimes. Critically, STLR+Discriminative, the ULMFiT champion, catastrophically fails on from-scratch tasks (43.6% on TREC-6 from scratch vs. 96.8% with RAdam), confirming that directional decay biases are harmful without pretrained features. DALS avoids either extreme, achieving the best synthetic result while maintaining competitive fine-tuning performance.
Ming-Hong Yao, Di Wang, Jian Cui +5