Judging Adam: Studying the Performance of Optimization Methods on ML4SE Tasks

D. Pasechnyuk, Anton Prazdnichnykh, Mikhail Evtikhiev, T. Bryksin
{"title":"Judging Adam: Studying the Performance of Optimization Methods on ML4SE Tasks","authors":"D. Pasechnyuk, Anton Prazdnichnykh, Mikhail Evtikhiev, T. Bryksin","doi":"10.1109/ICSE-NIER58687.2023.00027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Solving a problem with a deep learning model requires researchers to optimize the loss function with a certain optimization method. The research community has developed more than a hundred different optimizers, yet there is scarce data on optimizer performance in various tasks. In particular, none of the benchmarks test the performance of optimizers on source code-related problems. However, existing benchmark data indicates that certain optimizers may be more efficient for particular domains. In this work, we test the performance of various optimizers on deep learning models for source code and find that the choice of an optimizer can have a significant impact on the model quality, with up to two-fold score differences between some of the relatively well-performing optimizers. We also find that RAdam optimizer (and its modification with the Lookahead envelope) is the best optimizer that almost always performs well on the tasks we consider. Our findings show a need for a more extensive study of the optimizers in code-related tasks, and indicate that the ML4SE community should consider using RAdam instead of Adam as the default optimizer for code-related deep learning tasks.","PeriodicalId":297025,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE/ACM 45th International Conference on Software Engineering: New Ideas and Emerging Results (ICSE-NIER)","volume":"33 7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2023 IEEE/ACM 45th International Conference on Software Engineering: New Ideas and Emerging Results (ICSE-NIER)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE-NIER58687.2023.00027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Solving a problem with a deep learning model requires researchers to optimize the loss function with a certain optimization method. The research community has developed more than a hundred different optimizers, yet there is scarce data on optimizer performance in various tasks. In particular, none of the benchmarks test the performance of optimizers on source code-related problems. However, existing benchmark data indicates that certain optimizers may be more efficient for particular domains. In this work, we test the performance of various optimizers on deep learning models for source code and find that the choice of an optimizer can have a significant impact on the model quality, with up to two-fold score differences between some of the relatively well-performing optimizers. We also find that RAdam optimizer (and its modification with the Lookahead envelope) is the best optimizer that almost always performs well on the tasks we consider. Our findings show a need for a more extensive study of the optimizers in code-related tasks, and indicate that the ML4SE community should consider using RAdam instead of Adam as the default optimizer for code-related deep learning tasks.
判断亚当:ML4SE任务优化方法性能研究
用深度学习模型来解决问题,需要研究人员用一定的优化方法来优化损失函数。研究界已经开发了一百多种不同的优化器,但是关于优化器在各种任务中的性能的数据很少。特别是,没有一个基准测试测试优化器在源代码相关问题上的性能。然而,现有的基准数据表明,某些优化器可能对特定领域更有效。在这项工作中,我们测试了各种优化器在源代码深度学习模型上的性能,发现优化器的选择会对模型质量产生重大影响,一些性能相对较好的优化器之间的得分差异高达两倍。我们还发现,RAdam优化器(以及它对Lookahead信封的修改)是最好的优化器,几乎总是在我们考虑的任务上执行得很好。我们的研究结果表明,需要对代码相关任务中的优化器进行更广泛的研究,并表明ML4SE社区应该考虑使用RAdam而不是Adam作为代码相关深度学习任务的默认优化器。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信