Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

A Refresh Interval Does Not Fully Specify a Refresh Schedule: Learning-Rate-Dependent Placement in Kronecker-Preconditioned Language Model Training

Kronecker-preconditioned optimizers recompute a cached curvature eigendecomposition only periodically, and implementations and adaptive methods control this through the refresh frequency. We show that frequency leaves part of a schedule free: at a fixed number of refreshes, when they occur changes held-out loss at the same compute. Training GPT-style models with the Mousse optimizer across model sizes, we move the middle refreshes of a four-refresh schedule while fixing the first and last. On FineWeb the two placements exchanged rank as the learning rate rose (later placement was better at low rates, earlier placement at high ones), so a single-learning-rate comparison can report either r...

AuthorsXinyu Wang, Zhiwei Zhai, Yu Gu et al.
Primary categorycs.LG
Published13 October 2026
Last updated at source13 October 2026
cs.LG
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/5ff1a685-18d8-4e18-a60d-50a627fa7a62" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 15 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.