Papers › Random Shuffling Beats SGD Only After Many Epochs on Ill-Conditioned Problems

Random Shuffling Beats SGD Only After Many Epochs on Ill-Conditioned Problems

12 Jun 2021NeurIPS 2021 12arXiv:2106.06880archive 2025-07-28

Itay Safran, Ohad Shamir

Recently, there has been much interest in studying the convergence rates of without-replacement SGD, and proving that it is faster than with-replacement SGD in the worst case. However, known lower bounds ignore the problem's geometry, including its condition number, whereas the upper bounds explicitly depend on it. Perhaps surprisingly, we prove that when the condition number is taken into account, without-replacement SGD \emph{does not} significantly improve on with-replacement SGD in terms of worst-case bounds, unless the number of epochs (passes over the data) is larger than the condition number. Since many problems in machine learning and other areas are both ill-conditioned and involve large datasets, this indicates that without-replacement does not necessarily improve over with-replacement sampling for realistic iteration budgets. We show this by providing new lower and upper bounds which are tight (up to log factors), for quadratic problems with commuting quadratic terms, precisely quantifying the dependence on the problem parameters.

PaperPDFConference PDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

ItaySafran/SGD_condition_number officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHub report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. 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

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

SGD

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