Complexity Lower Bounds of Adaptive Gradient Algorithms for Non-convex Stochastic Optimization under Relaxed Smoothness
This work addresses a theoretical gap for researchers in optimization by demonstrating that adaptive algorithms face fundamental limitations under relaxed smoothness, which is incremental as it builds on prior convergence results.
The paper tackles the problem of understanding complexity lower bounds for adaptive gradient algorithms like AdaGrad in non-convex stochastic optimization under relaxed smoothness conditions, showing that these algorithms require at least quadratic dependence on problem parameters such as the initial optimality gap and smoothness constants, with a specific lower bound of Ω(Δ²L₁²σ²ε⁻⁴) for a decorrelated AdaGrad variant.
Recent results in non-convex stochastic optimization demonstrate the convergence of popular adaptive algorithms (e.g., AdaGrad) under the $(L_0, L_1)$-smoothness condition, but the rate of convergence is a higher-order polynomial in terms of problem parameters like the smoothness constants. The complexity guaranteed by such algorithms to find an $ε$-stationary point may be significantly larger than the optimal complexity of $Θ\left( ΔL σ^2 ε^{-4} \right)$ achieved by SGD in the $L$-smooth setting, where $Δ$ is the initial optimality gap, $σ^2$ is the variance of stochastic gradient. However, it is currently not known whether these higher-order dependencies can be tightened. To answer this question, we investigate complexity lower bounds for several adaptive optimization algorithms in the $(L_0, L_1)$-smooth setting, with a focus on the dependence in terms of problem parameters $Δ, L_0, L_1$. We provide complexity bounds for three variations of AdaGrad, which show at least a quadratic dependence on problem parameters $Δ, L_0, L_1$. Notably, we show that the decorrelated variant of AdaGrad-Norm requires at least $Ω\left( Δ^2 L_1^2 σ^2 ε^{-4} \right)$ stochastic gradient queries to find an $ε$-stationary point. We also provide a lower bound for SGD with a broad class of adaptive stepsizes. Our results show that, for certain adaptive algorithms, the $(L_0, L_1)$-smooth setting is fundamentally more difficult than the standard smooth setting, in terms of the initial optimality gap and the smoothness constants.