Analysis reveals the iterative limits for adaptive optimization algorithms in high dimensions, suggesting optimal strategies.
In large-scale applications, such as machine learning, it is desirable to design non-convex optimization algorithms with a high degree of parallelization. In this work, we study the adaptive complexity of finding a stationary point, which is the minimal number of sequential rounds required to achieve stationarity given polynomially many queries executed in parallel at each round. For the high-dimensional case, i.e., d = Ω(ε-(2 + 2p)/p), we show that for any (potentially randomized) algorithm, there exists a function with Lipschitz p-th order derivatives such that the algorithm requires at least ε-(p+1)/p iterations to find an ε-stationary point. Our lower bounds are tight and show that even with poly(d) queries per iteration, no algorithm has better convergence rate than those achievable with one-query-per-round algorithms. In other words, gradient descent, the cubic-regularized Newton's method, and the p-th order adaptive regularization method are adaptively optimal. Our proof relies upon novel analysis with the characterization of the output for the hardness potentials based on a chain-like structure with random partition. For the constant-dimensional case, i.e., d = Θ(1), we propose an algorithm that bridges grid search and gradient flow trapping, finding an approximate stationary point in constant iterations. Its asymptotic tightness is verified by a new lower bound on the required queries per iteration. We show there exists a smooth function such that any algorithm running with Θ(log (1/ε)) rounds requires at least Ω((1/ε)(d-1)/2) queries per round. This lower bound is tight up to a logarithmic factor, and implies that the gradient flow trapping is adaptively optimal.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhou et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: