MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409363815 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v39i21.34421

HVAdam: A Full-Dimension Adaptive Optimizer

2025· article· en· W4409363815 on OpenAlexaff
Yiheng Zhang, Shan Wu, Yuanzhuo Xu, Jiajun Wu, Shunshan Xu, S.L. Van Drew, Xiaoguang Niu

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersWuhan University
KeywordsDimension (graph theory)Fourth DimensionMathematicsComputer scienceMathematical optimizationPhysicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adaptive optimizers such as Adam and RMSProp have gained attraction in complex neural networks, including generative adversarial networks (GANs) and Transformers, thanks to their stable performance and fast convergence compared to non-adaptive optimizers. A frequently overlooked limitation of adaptive optimizers is that adjusting the learning rate of each dimension individually would ignore the knowledge of the whole loss landscape, resulting in slow updates of parameters, invalidating the learning rate adjustment strategy and eventually leading to widespread insufficient convergence of parameters. In this paper, we propose HVAdam, a novel optimizer that associates all dimensions of the parameters to find a new parameter update direction, leading to a refined parameter update strategy for an increased convergence rate. We validated HVAdam in extensive experiments, showing its faster convergence, higher accuracy, and more stable performance on image classification, image generation, and natural language processing tasks. Particularly, HVAdam achieves a significant improvement on GANs compared with other state-of-the-art methods, especially in Wasserstein-GAN (WGAN) and its improved version with gradient penalty (WGAN-GP).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207