Organizations: Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications, China · Anhui University of Science and Technology · Northeastern University, China
Low-rank adaptation (LoRA) often underperforms full fine-tuning. We investigate this performance gap through a tangent-space lens: factorized updates are confined to the tangent space of the current low-rank factors, leaving gradient components outside this space unexploited. An analysis of ten representative LoRA variants reveals that these residual components account for most of the gradient energy and exhibit strong spectral concentration. Motivated by this finding, we propose Dynamic Tangent LoRA (DT-LoRA), which partitions a fixed rank budget into a stable branch and a dynamic branch to capture the principal residual gradient directions. We show that these directions define the optimal update of a local quadratic model under orthogonal-complement and rank constraints. Matrix-free randomized SVD recovers them without materializing the residual gradient, while controlled write-back preserves accumulated updates and stabilizes training within the allocated rank. DT-LoRA adds no trainable parameters or inference cost over LoRA. Experiments across computer vision and natural language processing tasks demonstrate consistent improvements over LoRA and its variants. Moreover, despite being a general-purpose adaptation method, DT-LoRA outperforms task-specific approaches to open-vocabulary domain generalization for semantic segmentation, achieving state-of-the-art results. Code is available at https://github.com/Snipine/DT-LoRA.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Analysis of the tangent-space residual gradient. (a) Tangent-space residual gradient energy ratio ρ of ten LoRA variants. (b) Cumulative spectral energy Ek of the tangent-space residual gradient. (c) Gradient coverage 1−ρ of four LoRA variants and DT-LoRA during training. For various LoRA variants, the tangent-space residual gradient accounts for a large proportion of the gradient energy and exhibits spectral concentration. Our DT-LoRA explicitly accounts for this property, and its gradient coverage keeps increasing during training, indicating that the principal directions of the tangent-space residual gradient are effectively exploited.
Figure 2: Overview of DT-LoRA. A fixed rank budget is split into a Stable branch and a Dynamic branch. Every τ steps, Matrix-Free Randomized SVD extracts the principal directions of the tangent-space residual gradient from the cached activations X and output gradients R , yielding a candidate update H . Controlled Write-back then merges H into the Dynamic branch, keeping the branch at rank q . After training, both branches are merged into the pre-trained weights, so inference costs the same as LoRA.
Method
Param. (M)
Natural
Specialized
Structured
Avg.
Cifar100
Caltech101
DTD
Flower102
Pets
SVHN
Sun397
Camelyon
EuroSAT
Resisc45
Retinopathy
Clevr-Count
Clevr-Dist
DMLab
KITTI-Dist
dSpr-Loc
dSpr-Ori
sNORB-Azim
sNORB-Ele
Full FT
85.8
68.9
87.7
64.3
97.2
86.9
84.7
38.8
79.7
95.7
84.2
73.9
56.3
58.6
41.7
65.5
57.5
46.7
25.7
29.1
68.9
Linear
0
64.4
85.0
63.2
97.0
86.3
36.6
51.0
78.5
87.5
68.5
74.0
34.3
30.6
33.2
55.4
12.5
20.0
9.6
19.2
57.6
Adapter [ 11 ]
0.16
69.2
90.1
68.0
98.8
89.9
82.8
54.3
84.0
94.9
81.9
75.5
80.9
65.3
48.6
78.3
74.8
48.5
29.9
41.6
73.9
AdaptFormer [ 3 ]
0.16
70.8
91.2
70.5
99.1
90.9
86.6
54.8
83.0
95.8
84.4
76.3
81.9
64.3
49.3
80.3
76.3
45.7
31.7
41.1
74.7
AdaLoRA [ 44 ]
0.37
70.5
90.3
71.9
99.1
91.4
87.0
56.0
83.9
95.3
85.6
75.2
81.6
68.1
51.8
80.2
75.3
49.1
28.9
41.1
75.1
Table 1: Accuracy (%) on VTAB-1K across natural, specialized, and structured tasks. In all result tables, our method is shaded in gray and the best results are in bold.
Method
# Params (M)
Detection
Instance Segmentation
All Avg.
mAP
AP 50
AP 75
AP S
AP M
AP L
mAP
AP 50
AP 75
AP S
AP M
AP L
Full FT
104.97
49.0
69.1
54.6
31.7
53.5
61.7
43.4
66.2
47.6
23.4
47.1
60.9
50.7
LoRA r=16 [ 12 ]
17.27
35.5
55.9
38.9
22.7
38.4
45.1
33.6
53.1
36.3
17.4
35.9
48.2
38.4
LieRA [ 29 ]
17.27
39.1
59.9
43.1
25.9
42.6
49.2
37.0
57.6
40.2
20.1
40.0
53.2
42.3
DoRA [ 25 ]
17.27
39.7
60.6
43.6
25.3
43.2
51.4
37.2
57.9
40.1
19.4
40.2
53.9
42.7
DT-LoRA
17.27
44.1
65.2
48.2
28.7
47.9
56.5
40.3
62.6
43.6
21.9
43.5
57.1
46.6
Table 2: Object detection and instance segmentation results of fine-tuned ConvNeXt-V2-B on MS COCO.
Method
Backbone
Training Data
Dv-19
Dv-58
ACDC-19
BDD-19
Mapi-19
Avg.
ACDC-41
BDD-41
Mapi-30
RW-10
Avg.
OVSeg (CVPR’23) [ 22 ]
CS-7
36.6
40.9
45.8
41.1
41.2
48.3
31.7
32.6
38.5
SAN (CVPR’23) [ 39 ]
CS-7
37.6
39.4
44.0
40.3
44.3
46.8
35.4
30.7
39.3
CAT-Seg (CVPR’24) [ 4 ]
CS-7
38.9
44.0
47.6
43.5
47.6
51.6
38.2
36.5
43.5
MAFT+ (ECCV’24) [ 15 ]
CS-7
40.4
43.5
50.2
44.7
46.4
48.8
38.1
35.4
42.2
ESC-Net (CVPR’25) [ 16 ]
EVA02 [ 30 ] ViT-B/16
CS-7
40.4
43.6
45.9
43.3
47.3
49.2
40.1
34.5
42.7
Table 3: Comparison of different methods across different backbones under the Real-to-Real OVDG-SS setting.
Method
Backbone
Training Data
Dv-19
Dv-58
CS-19
ACDC-19
BDD-19
Mapi-19
Avg.
ACDC-41
BDD-41
Mapi-30
RW-10
Avg.
OVSeg (CVPR’23) [ 22 ]
GTA-7
41.2
34.9
42.5
45.1
40.9
45.1
52.6
35.5
32.9
41.5
SAN (CVPR’23) [ 39 ]
GTA-7
43.3
36.7
42.0
48.1
42.5
47.7
49.0
37.8
30.3
41.2
CAT-Seg (CVPR’24) [ 4 ]
GTA-7
43.7
37.6
45.4
48.8
43.9
51.2
56.2
39.3
35.7
45.6
MAFT+ (ECCV’24) [ 15 ]
GTA-7
45.7
38.5
43.7
50.2
44.5
49.1
48.3
39.9
31.8
42.3
ESC-Net (CVPR’25) [ 16 ]
EVA02 ViT-B/16
GTA-7
42.2
35.9
44.6
48.1
42.7
49.4
52.4
37.9
33.3
43.3
Table 4: Comparison of different methods across different backbones under the Synthetic-to-Real OVDG-SS setting.
Table 6: Results of fine-tuned DeBERTaV3-base on the GLUE development set.
Variant
OVDG-SS
MS COCO
Dv-19
Dv-58
Det.mAP
Seg.mAP
DT-LoRA w/o Dynamic Branch
52.7
48.5
36.2
34.5
DT-LoRA w/o Controlled Write-back
27.3
16.8
33.7
32.9
DT-LoRA w/ Full-Gradient Refresh
54.2
51.9
43.0
39.3
DT-LoRA
59.2
56.1
44.1
40.3
Table 7: Ablation study of the Dynamic branch in DT-LoRA on OVDG-SS and MS COCO. All variants use the same total rank r=16 .
Method
#Params (M)
Extra time
Extra memory
Time (s/iter)
Relative speed
LoRA [ 12 ]
4.33
-
-
0.82
5.55×
MF+RSVD (ours)
4.33
O(Nqd/τ)
O((N+d)q)
0.89
5.11×
DG+RSVD
4.33
O(Ndmind/τ)
O(dmind)
0.93
4.89×
MF+FSVD
4.33
O((N+dmin)dmind/τ)
O((N+d)dmin)
4.30
1.06×
DG+FSVD
4.33
O((N+dmin)dmind/τ)
O(dmind)
4.55
1.00×
Table 8: Training efficiency and extra cost of direction extraction. MF: Matrix-Free; DG: Dense gradient; RSVD/FSVD: Randomized/Full SVD. Speed is relative to DG+FSVD. Time is the steady-state per-iteration training time with τ=5 , measured on one A100 for OVDG-SS with CAT-Seg and EVA02 ViT-L/14 under the main experimental settings, extra memory excludes the cached X and R , and q≪dmin .
Appendix figures & tables9 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Split
Images
Classes
Usage
train2017
118,287
80
Training
val2017
5,000
80
Evaluation
Appendix
Table 10: Statistics of the MS COCO splits.
Split
Dataset
Source
Images
Resolution
Classes
Group
Train
CS-7
Cityscapes
2,975
2048×1024
7
–
Train
GTA-7
GTA5
24,999
2048×1024
7
–
Test
CS-19 (GTA-7 only)
Cityscapes
500
2048×1024
19
Dv-19
Test
ACDC-19
ACDC
1,600
1920×1080
19
Dv-19
Test
BDD-19
BDD100K
1,000
1280×720
19
Dv-19
Test
Mapi-19
Mapillary
2,000
2K–4K
19
Dv-19
Appendix
Table 11: Source and target datasets for OVDG-SS.
Task
Train
Test
Answer
BoolQ
9.4K
3,270
Yes/No
PIQA
16.1K
1,838
Option
SIQA
33.4K
1,954
Option
HellaSwag
39.9K
10,042
Option
WinoGrande
63.2K
1,267
Option
ARC-e
1.1K
2,376
Option
Appendix
Table 12: Statistics of the commonsense reasoning tasks.
Task
Type
Train
Dev
Metric
CoLA
Acceptability
8.5k
1.0k
Matthews Corr.
MNLI
NLI
393k
20k
Accuracy
MRPC
Paraphrase
3.7k
408
Accuracy
RTE
NLI
2.5k
277
Accuracy
QNLI
QA/NLI
105k
5.4k
Accuracy
SST-2
Sentiment
67k
872
Accuracy
Appendix
Table 13: GLUE tasks and statistics.
Hyperparameter
ViT-B/16
Rank r ( rs / rd )
8(6 / 2)
Refresh Interval τ
5 steps
Oversampling p
2
Power Iterations m
2
ρrefresh
0.25
ρjump
0.05
Appendix
Table 14: Hyperparameters of DT-LoRA on VTAB-1K.
Hyperparameter
ConvNeXt-V2-B
Adapted Modules
All Conv2d and Linear layers
Rank r ( rs / rd )
16 (12 / 4) / 32 (24 / 8)
α
16 / 32
Refresh Interval τ
5 steps
Oversampling p
4 / 8
Power Iterations m
2
Appendix
Table 15: Hyperparameters of DT-LoRA on MS COCO.
Hyperparameter
ViT-B/16
ViT-L/14
Adapted Modules
Q , K , V , O
Adapted Layers (visual / text)
12 / 12
24 / 12
Rank r ( rs / rd )
16 (12 / 4)
α
16
Refresh Interval τ
5 steps
Oversampling p
4
Appendix
Table 16: Hyperparameters of DT-LoRA on OVDG-SS.
Hyperparameter
LLaMA2-7B / LLaMA3-8B
Adapted Modules
Q , K , V , Up, Down
Rank r ( rs / rd )
16 (12 / 4)
α
16
Refresh Interval τ
5 steps
Oversampling p
4 / 8
Power Iterations m
2
Appendix
Table 17: Hyperparameters of DT-LoRA on commonsense reasoning.
Low-rank adaptation (LoRA) enables parameter-efficient fine-tuning by learning low-rank weight updates. Increasing rank expands adaptation capacity, but does not guarantee that all learned directions improve downstream performance. In a diagnostic experiment with rank-16 LoRA, we show that retaining only the top singular components achieves the best performance, whereas adding further components degrades it. Motivated by this, we propose Residual-Gradient Adaptation (ReGRA), a two-stage method for making more effective use of a fixed rank budget. After the first stage, ReGRA estimates task gradients on a calibration set and removes their projections onto the two-sided subspace induced by the first-stage update. It then aggregates the residual-gradient directions to initialize a second-stage adapter without changing the first-stage update. An orthogonality regularizer encourages the two updates to capture complementary directions. Both updates can be merged into the pretrained weights, incurring no additional inference overhead. Across diverse benchmark sets, ReGRA achieves stronger performance than alternatives with the same total rank and even matches LoRA adapters with twice the rank. Ablation studies and further analysis support the contribution of its core design choices. Code is available at https://github.com/Fanyao-Li/ReGRA.
Fanyao Li, Yuxi Liu, Xiaohao Liu +3
Communication University of China · National University of Singapore · Xidian University
Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) is a widely used approach to parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT), yet a performance gap can remain relative to full fine-tuning (FFT). Many LoRA variants improve the initialization or optimization of low-rank factors. At each training step, however, their first-order weight-space directions are constrained by the current parameterization. We characterize the corresponding LoRA-accessible gradient space and show that it coincides with the tangent space induced by the current LoRA parameterization. This characterization yields an orthogonal decomposition of the full weight gradient at the current model parameters. We term the component orthogonal to this space the normal gradient. Based on this decomposition, we propose GDLoRA (Gradient-Decomposed Low-Rank Adaptation). GDLoRA reconstructs the full weight gradient from forward activations and backward signals, extracts its normal component, and directly updates the base weights with this component, while retaining standard AdamW optimization for the LoRA factors. GDLoRA incorporates complementary normal gradients without increasing standard LoRA's optimizer-state memory budget under matched adapter and optimizer configurations. Experiments on natural language understanding, mathematical reasoning, commonsense reasoning, and image classification show that GDLoRA consistently improves over LoRA and narrows the performance gap to FFT. The code is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/GDLoRA.
Yihao Ouyang, Shiwei Li, Haozhao Wang +5
Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China · Hebei University of Technology, Tianjin, China
Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) is the most widely adopted method for fine-tuning large language models. Notably, LoRA is inherently overparameterized: multiple pairs of low-rank factors can yield the same adapted weight matrix. We show--both theoretically and empirically--that these pairs exhibit significantly different condition numbers. As a result, converging to different loss minimizers directly impacts the convergence rate of LoRA. Building on this observation, we introduce Balanced Low-Rank Adaptation (BaLoRA), a variant of LoRA that projects iterates onto a balanced manifold. This manifold improves the conditioning of the loss landscape while preserving the adapted matrix. The projection step is computationally lightweight and integrates seamlessly into existing fine-tuning pipelines. Empirically, BaLoRA converges faster than standard LoRA and achieves superior performance across a range of fine-tuning tasks.
Valérie Castin, Kimia Nadjahi, Pierre Ablin +1
1 ´Ecole Normale Sup´erieure PSL, Paris, France · 2CNRS · 3Apple, Paris, France.