Open Problem: Is AdamW Effective Under Heavy-Tailed Noise?

We establish the first convergence guarantees for the plain vector-form Adam optimizer under heavy-tailed stochastic noise. While several Adam variants are known to achieve optimal iteration complexity in bounded-variance nonsmooth nonconvex optimization, little is understood about their behavior when stochastic gradients admit only a bounded $p$-th central moment for some $p \in (1,2]$, a setting increasingly observed in modern deep learning. To address this gap, we generalize the recent online-to-nonconvex conversion framework to accommodate heavy-tailed martingale-difference noise. Building on this generalized framework, we develop a discounted regret analysis for Adam, without restrictive parameter coupling. Our results show that Adam converges to $(ρ,ε)$-stationary points under heavy-tailed noise. However, it exhibits a suboptimal iteration complexity and $p$-dependent convergence, a suboptimality that persists even in the bounded-variance case ($p=2$). Specifically, the $ε$-dominant term in the iteration complexity for reaching in-expectation stationarity is $T=\mathrm{O}\left(Δρ^{1/2}(G+σ)^{\frac{5p}{3p-4}}ε^{-\left(\frac{5p}{3p-4}+\frac{3}{2}\right)}\right)$ for $p\in(\frac{4}{3},2]$, which simplifies to $T=\mathrm{O}(ε^{-13/2})$ when $p=2$. When the domain radius is known and used to control the online-learner output, a standard setup in related literature, the convergence rate improves to match the optimal complexity. In this case, the $ε$-dominant iteration complexity is $T=\mathrm{O}\left(Δρ^{1/2}(G+σ)^{\frac{p}{p-1}}ε^{-\left(\frac{p}{p-1}+\frac{3}{2}\right)}\right)$ for $p\in(1,2]$, which simplifies to $T=\mathrm{O}(ε^{-7/2})$ when $p=2$. These findings provide new theoretical insight into the robustness and limitations of Adam in heavy-tailed regimes.

Training large language models requires optimization algorithms that are not only statistically effective, but also computationally and memory efficient at extreme scale. Although Adam remains the dominant optimizer for large-scale language-model pretraining and fine-tuning, recent work has revisited nearly every component of the optimization stack: adaptive moment estimation, decoupled weight decay, memory footprint, curvature approximation, sign-based updates, large-batch stability, low-rank gradient structure, and matrix-wise orthogonalized updates. This survey reviews optimizer design for large language models through a systems-and-optimization lens. We organize the literature into classical first-order optimizers, adaptive optimizers, memory-efficient variants, second-order and curvature-aware methods, sign-based and discovered optimizers, low-rank and projection-based methods, and matrix-based optimizers such as Muon. We also discuss benchmarking methodology, including hyperparameter fairness, scale dependence, wall-clock efficiency, token efficiency, memory overhead, and downstream evaluation. We argue that optimizer research for LLMs is entering a new phase: moving from single-algorithm speedup claims toward rigorous, scale-aware comparisons that jointly evaluate convergence, stability, memory, and implementation complexity.

The impressive performance of large language models (LLMs) arises from their massive scale and heterogeneous module composition. However, this structural heterogeneity introduces additional optimization challenges. While adaptive optimizers such as Adam(W) provide per-parameter adaptivity, they do not explicitly account for module-level gradient heterogeneity, resulting in slower convergence, suboptimal performance, or training instability. Existing approaches typically rely on manually tuned module-specific learning rates or specific optimization strategies, which are computationally costly and difficult to generalize across tasks or models. To establish a more principled approach, we first analyze the noise-damping behavior of Adam in high-noise modules and introduce \textbf{Module-wise Learning Rate Scaling via SNR (MoLS)}. MoLS estimates module-level SNRs to scale Adam updates, allowing automated module-wise learning rate allocation without manual tuning. Empirical results through multiple LLM training benchmarks demonstrate that MoLS improves convergence speed and generalization, achieving performance comparable to carefully tuned module-specific learning rates, while remaining compatible with memory-efficient training algorithms.