Papers › Understanding the robustness difference between stochastic gradient descent and...

Understanding the robustness difference between stochastic gradient descent and adaptive gradient methods

13 Aug 2023arXiv:2308.06703archive 2025-07-28

Avery Ma, Yangchen Pan, Amir-Massoud Farahmand

Stochastic gradient descent (SGD) and adaptive gradient methods, such as Adam and RMSProp, have been widely used in training deep neural networks. We empirically show that while the difference between the standard generalization performance of models trained using these methods is small, those trained using SGD exhibit far greater robustness under input perturbations. Notably, our investigation demonstrates the presence of irrelevant frequencies in natural datasets, where alterations do not affect models' generalization performance. However, models trained with adaptive methods show sensitivity to these changes, suggesting that their use of irrelevant frequencies can lead to solutions sensitive to perturbations. To better understand this difference, we study the learning dynamics of gradient descent (GD) and sign gradient descent (signGD) on a synthetic dataset that mirrors natural signals. With a three-dimensional input space, the models optimized with GD and signGD have standard risks close to zero but vary in their adversarial risks. Our result shows that linear models' robustness to ℓ₂-norm bounded changes is inversely proportional to the model parameters' weight norm: a smaller weight norm implies better robustness. In the context of deep learning, our experiments show that SGD-trained neural networks have smaller Lipschitz constants, explaining the better robustness to input perturbations than those trained with adaptive gradient methods.

Code

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

13 samples harvested; 11 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 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: 13 of the 13 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 averyma/opt-robust. “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 archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

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