Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2608.30382

Convergence rates for the RMSprop optimizer with full control of the hyperparameters

Abstract

Popular adaptive stochastic gradient descent (SGD) methods to train artificial intelligence (AI) systems include the RMSprop, the Adam, and the AdamW optimizers, where the adaptivity parts in Adam and AdamW basically just coincide with RMSprop. Such adaptive methods involve several hyperparameters including the regularization parameter $ε$ (which ensures that one does not divide by 0 and is often chosen to be very close to zero such as $10^{-8}$ in PyTorch by default) and the second moment decay parameter $β$ (which is often chosen to be very close to $1$ such as 0.99 (RMSprop) and 0.999 (Adam and AdamW) in PyTorch by default). Despite the high relevance of such methods, it remains an open research problem to provide error estimates for such methods with the error constants being not exploding but uniformly bounded with the respect to the hyperparameters, even in the situation of convex stochastic optimization problems. It is the key contribution of this work to essentially solve this problem for RMSprop. Specifically, we bound the expectation of the stopped evaluation of the objective function at the RMSprop process from above by the sum of an initialization term that decays exponentially in the training time, a stochastic approximation remainder of order $γ_n$, and a memory error of order $( 1 - β)^2$ with the error constants being uniformly controlled over all admissible choices of the step sizes, the second moment decay parameter $β$ and the regularization parameter $ε\in[0,1]$ (also covering $ε=0$). Our non-asymptotic error estimates hold not just for all sufficiently large n but hold for every gradient step $n=1,2,3,...$ with all error constants being explicitly specified. The key innovative new feature in the proof of our analysis are suitable inverse moment bounds for the second moment process in RMSprop.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Steffen Dereich, Arnulf Jentzen. 2026-08-31. Convergence rates for the RMSprop optimizer with full control of the hyperparameters. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.30382

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

On two proofs of $d^2$ mixing of weighted Dikin walks

We study the mixing time of weighted Dikin walks for sampling from exponential distributions on polytopes and truncated positive-semidefinite (PSD) cones. Our first result gives a general total-variation mixing bound under strong self-concordance, $\barν$-symmetry, and mixed-trace regularity on the local metric. The key idea is to control the Metropolis--Hastings acceptance probability on a high-probability region rather than at every point. Applying this framework to the Lee--Sidford, Lewis-weight, and John metrics yields an $\widetilde O(d^2)$ mixing bound for sampling from polytopes, while applying it to a hybrid barrier yields an $\widetilde O(d^4)$ mixing bound for sampling from truncated PSD cones. Our second result establishes stronger $χ^2$-divergence guarantees and pointwise acceptance control using a new fourth-order bootstrap condition. For a suitably scaled Lee--Sidford metric, this yields an $\widetilde O(d^2)$ mixing bound in $χ^2$-divergence, improving on the previous $\widetilde O(d^{9/4})$ bound.

cs.DS

Two Adjoint Perspectives on Fokker-Planck Optimization: A Microscopic-Macroscopic Correspondence

The Fokker-Planck equation admits both a macroscopic Eulerian description through probability densities and a microscopic Lagrangian description through stochastic trajectories. Consequently, optimization problems constrained by the Fokker-Planck equation can be formulated from either perspective. Surprisingly, the corresponding adjoint equations appear to be fundamentally different: the macroscopic adjoint is governed by the backward Kolmogorov equation, whereas the microscopic adjoint evolves pathwise along stochastic trajectories. In this note, we reconcile these two formulations by establishing their correspondence in the continuum setting. We further show that, although their discrete gradients no longer coincide after discretization, both provide consistent numerical approximations of the continuum gradient. Explicit convergence rates are established for both discretization strategies.

math.NA