cs.LGAug 19, 2026

Many Optimizers But Only One Training Path: Repeated Resampling for Adaptive Optimizer Selection

Authors: Ronald Richman, Mario V. Wüthrich

Organizations: insureAI · ETH Zürich

Abstract

An optimizer is usually chosen before training a deep neural network and then kept fixed. Treating optimizer choice as a hyperparameter could boost performance, but it requires several complete training runs and discards all but the winner. Repeated Optimizer Resampling (ROR) instead searches during one evolving run. Every bb epochs, each candidate optimizer scouts from the current model weights for ss epochs. The best scout continues for the remaining b−sb-s epochs, and that completed segment becomes the new incumbent if it improves the validation objective. This design allows the preferred optimizer to change as training progresses. We compare two variants of ROR on MNIST, Fashion-MNIST, and two motor insurance claim-count models. Nine fixed optimizers and both ROR variants are evaluated with the same ten seeds. One-epoch ROR uses 24% to 35% of the aggregate training needed to identify the best fixed optimizer exhaustively and remains close to that optimizer on all four tasks. These results support short scouting as a practical way to search over optimizers without completing every candidate run.

Figures & tables

Appendix figures & tables2 assets

Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.

Appendix

Explore similar work

Feb 20, 2026

OptiRoulette Optimizer: A New Stochastic Meta-Optimizer for up to 5.3x Faster Convergence

This paper presents OptiRoulette, a stochastic meta-optimizer that selects update rules during training instead of fixing a single optimizer. The method combines warmup optimizer locking, random sampling from an active optimizer pool, compatibility-aware learning-rate scaling during optimizer transitions, and failure-aware pool replacement. OptiRoulette is implemented as a drop-in, "torch.optim.Optimizer-compatible" component and packaged for pip installation. We report completed 10-seed results on five image-classification suites: CIFAR-100, CIFAR-100-C, SVHN, Tiny ImageNet, and Caltech-256. Against a single-optimizer AdamW baseline, OptiRoulette improves mean test accuracy from 0.6734 to 0.7656 on CIFAR-100 (+9.22 percentage points), 0.2904 to 0.3355 on CIFAR-100-C (+4.52), 0.9667 to 0.9756 on SVHN (+0.89), 0.5669 to 0.6642 on Tiny ImageNet (+9.73), and 0.5946 to 0.6920 on Caltech-256 (+9.74). Its main advantage is convergence reliability at higher targets: it reaches CIFAR-100/CIFAR-100-C 0.75, SVHN 0.96, Tiny ImageNet 0.65, and Caltech-256 0.62 validation accuracy in 10/10 runs, while the AdamW baseline reaches none of these targets within budget. On shared targets, OptiRoulette also reduces time-to-target (e.g., Caltech-256 at 0.59: 25.7 vs 77.0 epochs). Paired-seed deltas are positive on all datasets; CIFAR-100-C test ROC-AUC is the only metric not statistically significant in the current 10-seed study.
Sep 28, 2026

EvE: An Alternate Optimizer to Adam

Adam and its variants dominate neural network training, but a single run only reveals whether a configuration works well after most of its budget is spent, a poor fit for hyperparameter or architecture search, where configurations must be ranked cheaply and pruned early. We introduce EvE (Evolutionary Explorer), a steady-state, population-of-four differential evolution (DE) optimizer with a targeted Adam fallback: each iteration proposes one candidate via DE, running a short burst of gradient descent only if the DE step fails to improve on the incumbent. Selection is greedy, so on a deterministic objective the best-so-far value is provably monotone non-increasing, and since gradients are used only as a targeted rescue, per-iteration cost stays within a constant factor of a single Adam step regardless of dimension. Under a fixed, evaluation-cost-matched budget, EvE wins or ties Adam on 76% of 70 (problem, dimension) cells across seven scalable benchmarks up to one million variables. On three real neural-network tasks (an MLP on MNIST, and LoRA fine-tuning of a 1.5B-parameter language model on two datasets) EvE finishes the same charged budget 1.7-3.9x faster, at a modest cost in final quality (about one accuracy point on MNIST, 9-11% higher relative test loss on the two fine-tuning tasks; on GSM8K, Adam is about 5 accuracy points more accurate, and fine-tuning lowers accuracy below the base model for both). Inside successive halving on UCI Adult, EvE completes hyperparameter and architecture searches 3.1-3.5x faster, ranking configurations about as consistently with Adam as Adam does with itself across seeds (Kendall's tau 0.66-0.69). EvE is not a total replacement for Adam as a final-stage trainer, but a fast, gradient-aware proxy for the search-heavy, budget-constrained regime one level up.
Aug 3, 2026

AOS: Adaptive Optimizer Switching via Training-State Signals for Faster Convergence and Better Generalization

Single-optimizer training is a poor fit for the distinct phases of deep network optimization: adaptive methods handle noisy early gradients well but overshoot flat minima, while SGD with momentum generalizes better in the late phase but converges slowly early on. We introduce AOS-R (Adaptive Optimizer Switching, Rule-Based), a lightweight controller that monitors six online gradient-space signals -- gradient noise scale (GNS), Hutchinson curvature trace, loss stagnation, update stability ratio, gradient stability index (GSI), and loss improvement ratio (LIR) -- and switches among AdamW, SGD-M, and Lion as the optimization landscape evolves. State-preserving momentum transfer and a 400-step learning-rate bridge prevent accuracy degradation at every transition point. On CIFAR-100/WRN-28x10, AOS-R reaches 78% top-1 in 81 epochs -- 26% fewer than AdamW (109), 43% fewer than SGD-M (143), and 16% fewer than Lion (96). Across eight model-dataset benchmarks, AOS-R achieves best accuracy on 6 of 8 combinations with a mean +0.4 pp gain and 0.80x convergence speedup over AdamW under a single shared hyperparameter configuration.