Multiplicative vs. Additive State Coupling in Learned Optimizer Schedules
Organizations: Qualcomm AI Research
Abstract
We learn schedules for a continuous penalty relaxation of MAX-CUT by backpropagating through an unrolled classical solver. A state-blind schedule generalizes to instances substantially larger than those used for training. A state-adaptive bilinear schedule also generalizes out of distribution, outperforming its untrained baseline across 15 seeds (). By contrast, an additive ablation with identical inputs and output heads is statistically indistinguishable from the bilinear model in distribution but performs worse than its own baseline out of distribution (). This separation appears without regularization and persists across a round weight-decay sweep: the bilinear advantage remains significant at every tested value, whereas the additive model never recovers. The results in this setting isolate how solver state enters the schedule, rather than state adaptivity alone, as the architectural distinction associated with out-of-distribution transfer.
Figures & tables
| synthetic (discrete cut) | Biq Mac ratio to optimum | |||
| Model | frozen | learned | frozen | learned |
| State-blind (scalar) | ||||
| Bilinear | ||||
| Additive (ablation) | ||||
| Tuned fixed schedule (common reference) | ||||
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Model | Biq Mac | SE | sign | Hard #opt | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bilinear | (ref.) | |||||
| Bilinear | ||||||
| Bilinear | ||||||
| Bilinear | ||||||
| Bilinear | ||||||
| Additive | (ref.) |
Learning to Optimize
Learning to Optimize uses data to adapt algorithms, solver decisions, and solution maps for faster or better optimization.
See all 139 papers