Papers › When and Why SignSGD Outperforms SGD: A Theoretical Study Based on ℓ₁-norm Lower Bounds

When and Why SignSGD Outperforms SGD: A Theoretical Study Based on ℓ₁-norm Lower Bounds

7 May 2026arXiv:2605.06615added by Syntology

Hongyi Tao, Dingzhi Yu, Lijun Zhang

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Sign-based optimization algorithms, such as SignSGD and Muon, have garnered significant attention for their remarkable performance in training large foundation models. Despite this empirical success, we still lack a theoretical understanding of when and why these sign-based methods outperform vanilla SGD. The core obstacle is that under standard smoothness and finite variance conditions, SGD is known to be minimax optimal for finding stationary points measured by ℓ₂-norms, thereby fundamentally precluding any complexity gains for sign-based methods in standard settings. To overcome this barrier, we analyze sign-based optimizers leveraging ℓ₁-norm stationarity, ℓ_∞-smoothness, and a separable noise model, which can better capture the coordinate-wise nature of signed updates. Under this distinct problem geometry, we derive matched upper and lower bounds for SignSGD and explicitly characterize the problem class in which SignSGD provably dominates SGD. Specifically, we compare the \emph{upper bound of SignSGD} with the \emph{lower bound of SGD}, illustrating that SignSGD effectively reduces the complexity by a factor of d under \emph{sparse noise}, where d is the problem dimension. Furthermore, we elevate this framework to the matrix domain, providing an equivalent optimal lower bound for the Muon optimizer, proving that extending the sign operator to matrices preserves this optimal scaling with dimensionality. Finally, we bridge our theoretical bounds to practice, demonstrating that the theoretical superiority of SignSGD accurately predicts its faster convergence during the pretraining of a 124M parameter GPT-2 model.

Code

Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

12 samples harvested; 8 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 4 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 4 of the 12 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2605.06615, was issued in May 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections