Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Depen Morwani

dblp:277/5200 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
9ranked-venue papers
4as first author
9since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 9 · 4 first-author · 9 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
8 papers
Optimization for machine learning · 40% Learning theory · 29% Deep learning architectures and training · 16%

Topics — the 21 heaviest of 23, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
adaptive optimization
1.722025
Deconstructing What Makes a Good Optimizer for Autoregressive Language Models · ICLR 2025
SOAP: Improving and Stabilizing Shampoo using Adam for Language Modeling · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic gradient descent
1.622025
Deconstructing What Makes a Good Optimizer for Autoregressive Language Models · ICLR 2025
Beyond Implicit Bias: The Insignificance of SGD Noise in Online Learning · ICML 2024
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
training dynamics
1.422024
Beyond Implicit Bias: The Insignificance of SGD Noise in Online Learning · ICML 2024
Feature-Learning Networks Are Consistent Across Widths At Realistic Scales · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › adaptive optimization
adam variants
0.912025
SOAP: Improving and Stabilizing Shampoo using Adam for Language Modeling · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › stochastic gradient descent
critical batch size
0.912025
How Does Critical Batch Size Scale in Pre-training? · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › second-order optimization
kronecker-factored preconditioning
0.912025
A New Perspective on Shampoo's Preconditioner · ICLR 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › large language model training
large-scale pretraining
0.912025
How Does Critical Batch Size Scale in Pre-training? · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
optimizer benchmarking
0.912025
Deconstructing What Makes a Good Optimizer for Autoregressive Language Models · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
scaling laws
0.912025
How Does Critical Batch Size Scale in Pre-training? · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
second-order optimization
0.912025
A New Perspective on Shampoo's Preconditioner · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
training optimization
0.912025
SOAP: Improving and Stabilizing Shampoo using Adam for Language Modeling · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Learning theory › neural network theory
feature learning theory
0.812024
Feature emergence via margin maximization: case studies in algebraic tasks · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory
implicit bias
0.812024
Beyond Implicit Bias: The Insignificance of SGD Noise in Online Learning · ICML 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory › implicit bias
implicit bias of gradient descent
0.812024
Feature emergence via margin maximization: case studies in algebraic tasks · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory
online learning
0.812024
Beyond Implicit Bias: The Insignificance of SGD Noise in Online Learning · ICML 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory › neural network theory
infinite-width limit
0.712023
Feature-Learning Networks Are Consistent Across Widths At Realistic Scales · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory
neural network theory
0.712023
Simplicity Bias in 1-Hidden Layer Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory › neural network theory › neural network kernels
neural tangent kernel
0.712023
Feature-Learning Networks Are Consistent Across Widths At Realistic Scales · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness
0.712023
Simplicity Bias in 1-Hidden Layer Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory › inductive bias
simplicity bias
0.712023
Simplicity Bias in 1-Hidden Layer Neural Networks · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Kernel, tree and ensemble methods
model ensemble
0.212023
Feature-Learning Networks Are Consistent Across Widths At Realistic Scales · NeurIPS 2023

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

adafactor · 1.7shampoo · 0.9scaling laws · 0.9power iteration · 0.9hyperparameter sweep · 0.9gauss-newton approximation · 0.9eigendecomposition · 0.9adam · 0.9adalayer · 0.9adagrad · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 SOAP: Improving and Stabilizing Shampoo using Adam for Language Modeling
abstract
There is growing evidence of the effectiveness of Shampoo, a higher-order preconditioning method, over Adam in deep learning optimization tasks. However, Shampoo's drawbacks include additional hyperparameters and computational overhead when compared to Adam, which only updates running averages of first- and second-moment quantities. This work establishes a formal connection between Shampoo (implemented with the 1/2 power) and Adafactor --- a memory-efficient approximation of Adam --- showing that Shampoo is equivalent to running Adafactor in the eigenbasis of Shampoo's preconditioner. This insight leads to the design of a simpler and computationally efficient algorithm: **S**hampo**O** with **A**dam in the **P**reconditioner's eigenbasis (SOAP). With regards to improving Shampoo's computational efficiency, the most straightforward approach would be to simply compute Shampoo's eigendecomposition less frequently. Unfortunately, as our empirical results show, this leads to performance degradation that worsens with this frequency. SOAP mitigates this degradation by continually updating the running average of the second moment, just as Adam does, but in the current (slowly changing) coordinate basis. Furthermore, since SOAP is equivalent to running Adam in a rotated space, it introduces only one additional hyperparameter (the preconditioning frequency) compared to Adam. We empirically evaluate SOAP on language model pre-training with 360m and 660m sized models. In the large batch regime, SOAP reduces the number of iterations by over 40\% and wall clock time by over 35\% compared to AdamW, with approximately 20\% improvements in both metrics compared to Shampoo. An implementation of SOAP is available at https://github.com/nikhilvyas/SOAP.
Nikhil Vyas 0001, Depen Morwani, Rosie Zhao, Itai Shapira, David Brandfonbrener, Lucas Janson, Sham M. Kakade
ICLR2
2025 A New Perspective on Shampoo's Preconditioner
abstract
Shampoo, a second-order optimization algorithm that uses a Kronecker product preconditioner, has recently received increasing attention from the machine learning community. Despite the increasing popularity of Shampoo, the theoretical foundations of its effectiveness are not well understood. The preconditioner used by Shampoo can be viewed as either an approximation of the Gauss--Newton component of the Hessian or the covariance matrix of the gradients maintained by Adagrad. Our key contribution is providing an explicit and novel connection between the optimal Kronecker product approximation of these matrices and the approximation made by Shampoo. Our connection highlights a subtle but common misconception about Shampoo’s approximation. In particular, the square of the approximation used by the Shampoo optimizer is equivalent to a single step of the power iteration algorithm for computing the aforementioned optimal Kronecker product approximation. Across a variety of datasets and architectures we empirically demonstrate that this is close to the optimal Kronecker product approximation. We also study the impact of batch gradients and empirical Fisher on the quality of Hessian approximation. Our findings not only advance the theoretical understanding of Shampoo but also illuminate potential pathways for enhancing its practical performance.
Depen Morwani, Itai Shapira, Nikhil Vyas 0001, Eran Malach, Sham M. Kakade, Lucas Janson
ICLR1
2025 How Does Critical Batch Size Scale in Pre-training?
abstract
Training large-scale models under given resources requires careful design of parallelism strategies. In particular, the efficiency notion of critical batch size (CBS), concerning the compromise between time and compute, marks the threshold beyond which greater data parallelism leads to diminishing returns. To operationalize it, we propose a measure of CBS and pre-train a series of auto-regressive language models, ranging from 85 million to 1.2 billion parameters, on the C4 dataset. Through extensive hyper-parameter sweeps and careful control of factors such as batch size, momentum, and learning rate along with its scheduling, we systematically investigate the impact of scale on CBS. Then we fit scaling laws with respect to model and data sizes to decouple their effects. Overall, our results demonstrate that CBS scales primarily with data size rather than model size, a finding we justify theoretically through the analysis of infinite-width limits of neural networks and infinite-dimensional least squares regression. Of independent interest, we highlight the importance of common hyper-parameter choices and strategies for studying large-scale pre-training beyond fixed training durations.
Hanlin Zhang 0002, Depen Morwani, Nikhil Vyas 0001, Jingfeng Wu, Difan Zou, Udaya Ghai, Dean P. Foster, Sham M. Kakade
ICLR2
2025 Deconstructing What Makes a Good Optimizer for Autoregressive Language Models
abstract
Training language models becomes increasingly expensive with scale, prompting numerous attempts to improve optimization efficiency. Despite these efforts, the Adam optimizer remains the most widely used, due to a prevailing view that it is the most effective approach. We aim to compare several optimization algorithms, including SGD, Adafactor, Adam, Lion, and Sophia in the context of autoregressive language modeling across a range of model sizes, hyperparameters, and architecture variants. Our findings indicate that, except for SGD, these algorithms all perform comparably both in their optimal performance and also in terms of how they fare across a wide range of hyperparameter choices. Our results suggest to practitioners that the choice of optimizer can be guided by practical considerations like memory constraints and ease of implementation, as no single algorithm emerged as a clear winner in terms of performance or stability to hyperparameter misspecification. Given our findings, we further dissect these approaches, examining two simplified versions of Adam: a) signed momentum (Signum) which we see recovers both the performance and hyperparameter stability of Adam and b) Adalayer, a layerwise variant of Adam which we introduce to study the impact on Adam's preconditioning for different layers of the network. Examining Adalayer leads us to the conclusion that, perhaps surprisingly, adaptivity on *both* the last layer and LayerNorm parameters in particular are necessary for retaining performance and stability to learning rate.
Rosie Zhao, Depen Morwani, David Brandfonbrener, Nikhil Vyas 0001, Sham M. Kakade
ICLR2
2024 Feature emergence via margin maximization: case studies in algebraic tasks
abstract
Understanding the internal representations learned by neural networks is a cornerstone challenge in the science of machine learning. While there have been significant recent strides in some cases towards understanding *how* neural networks implement specific target functions, this paper explores a complementary question -- *why* do networks arrive at particular computational strategies? Our inquiry focuses on the algebraic learning tasks of modular addition, sparse parities, and finite group operations. Our primary theoretical findings analytically characterize the features learned by stylized neural networks for these algebraic tasks. Notably, our main technique demonstrates how the principle of margin maximization alone can be used to fully specify the features learned by the network. Specifically, we prove that the trained networks utilize Fourier features to perform modular addition and employ features corresponding to irreducible group-theoretic representations to perform compositions in general groups, aligning closely with the empirical observations of Nanda et al. (2023) and Chughtai et al. (2023). More generally, we hope our techniques can help to foster a deeper understanding of why neural networks adopt specific computational strategies.
Depen Morwani, Benjamin L. Edelman, Costin-Andrei Oncescu, Rosie Zhao, Sham M. Kakade
ICLR1
2024 Beyond Implicit Bias: The Insignificance of SGD Noise in Online Learning
abstract
The success of SGD in deep learning has been ascribed by prior works to the *implicit bias* induced by finite batch sizes (''SGD noise''). While prior works focused on *offline learning* (i.e., multiple-epoch training), we study the impact of SGD noise on *online* (i.e., single epoch) learning. Through an extensive empirical analysis of image and language data, we demonstrate that small batch sizes do *not* confer any implicit bias advantages in online learning. In contrast to offline learning, the benefits of SGD noise in online learning are strictly computational, facilitating more cost-effective gradient steps. This suggests that SGD in the online regime can be construed as taking noisy steps along the ''golden path'' of the noiseless *gradient descent* algorithm. We study this hypothesis and provide supporting evidence in loss and function space. Our findings challenge the prevailing understanding of SGD and offer novel insights into its role in online learning.
Nikhil Vyas 0001, Depen Morwani, Rosie Zhao, Gal Kaplun, Sham M. Kakade, Boaz Barak
ICML2
2023 Feature-Learning Networks Are Consistent Across Widths At Realistic Scales
abstract
We study the effect of width on the dynamics of feature-learning neural networks across a variety of architectures and datasets. Early in training, wide neural networks trained on online data have not only identical loss curves but also agree in their point-wise test predictions throughout training. For simple tasks such as CIFAR-5m this holds throughout training for networks of realistic widths. We also show that structural properties of the models, including internal representations, preactivation distributions, edge of stability phenomena, and large learning rate effects are consistent across large widths. This motivates the hypothesis that phenomena seen in realistic models can be captured by infinite-width, feature-learning limits. For harder tasks (such as ImageNet and language modeling), and later training times, finite-width deviations grow systematically. Two distinct effects cause these deviations across widths. First, the network output has an initialization-dependent variance scaling inversely with width, which can be removed by ensembling networks. We observe, however, that ensembles of narrower networks perform worse than a single wide network. We call this the bias of narrower width. We conclude with a spectral perspective on the origin of this finite-width bias.
Nikhil Vyas 0001, Alexander B. Atanasov, Blake Bordelon, Depen Morwani, Sabarish Sainathan, Cengiz Pehlevan
NeurIPS4
2023 Simplicity Bias in 1-Hidden Layer Neural Networks
abstract
Recent works have demonstrated that neural networks exhibit extreme *simplicity bias* (SB). That is, they learn *only the simplest* features to solve a task at hand, even in the presence of other, more robust but more complex features. Due to the lack of a general and rigorous definition of *features*, these works showcase SB on *semi-synthetic* datasets such as Color-MNIST , MNIST-CIFAR where defining features is relatively easier. In this work, we rigorously define as well as thoroughly establish SB for *one hidden layer* neural networks in the infinite width regime. More concretely, (i) we define SB as the network essentially being a function of a low dimensional projection of the inputs (ii) theoretically, we show that when the data is linearly separable, the network primarily depends on only the linearly separable ($1$-dimensional) subspace even in the presence of an arbitrarily large number of other, more complex features which could have led to a significantly more robust classifier, (iii) empirically, we show that models trained on *real* datasets such as Imagenet and Waterbirds-Landbirds indeed depend on a low dimensional projection of the inputs, thereby demonstrating SB on these datasets, iv) finally, we present a natural ensemble approach that encourages diversity in models by training successive models on features not used by earlier models, and demonstrate that it yields models that are significantly more robust to Gaussian noise.
Depen Morwani, Jatin Batra, Prateek Jain 0002, Praneeth Netrapalli
NeurIPS1
2022 Inductive Bias of Gradient Descent for Weight Normalized Smooth Homogeneous Neural Nets
abstract
We analyze the inductive bias of gradient descent for weight normalized smooth homogeneous neural nets, when trained on exponential or cross-entropy loss. We analyse both standard weight normalization (SWN) and exponential weight normalization (EWN), and show that the gradient flow path with EWN is equivalent to gradient flow on standard networks with an adaptive learning rate. We extend these results to gradient descent, and establish asymptotic relations between weights and gradients for both SWN and EWN. We also show that EWN causes weights to be updated in a way that prefers asymptotic relative sparsity. For EWN, we provide a finite-time convergence rate of the loss with gradient flow and a tight asymptotic convergence rate with gradient descent. We demonstrate our results for SWN and EWN on synthetic data sets. Experimental results on simple datasets support our claim on sparse EWN solutions, even with SGD. This demonstrates its potential applications in learning neural networks amenable to pruning.
Depen Morwani, Harish G. Ramaswamy
ALT1