Recently, the mysterious In-Context Learning (ICL) ability exhibited by Transformer architectures, especially in large language models (LLMs), has sparked significant research interest. However, the resilience of Transformers’ in-context learning capabilities in the presence of noisy samples, prevalent in both training corpora and prompt demonstrations, remains underexplored. In this paper, inspired by prior research that studies ICL ability using simple function classes, we take a closer look at this problem by investigating the robustness of Transformers against noisy labels. Specifically, we first conduct a thorough evaluation and analysis of the robustness of Transformers against noisy labels during in-context learning and show that they exhibit notable resilience against diverse types of noise in demonstration labels. Furthermore, we delve deeper into this problem by exploring whether introducing noise into the training set, akin to a form of data augmentation, enhances such robustness during inference, and find that such noise can indeed improve the robustness of ICL. Overall, our fruitful analysis and findings provide a comprehensive understanding of the resilience of Transformer models against label noises during ICL and provide valuable insights into the research on Transformers in natural language processing. Our code is available at https://github.com/InezYu0928/in-context-learning.

Training large models is both resource-intensive and time-consuming, making it crucial to understand the quantitative relationship between model performance and hyperparameters. In this paper, we derive an empirical law that predicts pretraining loss for large language models for every intermediate training step across various learning rate schedules, including constant, cosine, and step decay schedules. Our proposed law takes a multi-power form, combining a power law based on the sum of learning rates and additional power laws to account for a loss reduction effect as learning rate decays. We validate this law extensively on Llama-2 models of varying sizes and demonstrate that, after fitting on a few learning rate schedules, it accurately predicts the loss curves for unseen schedules of different shapes and horizons. Moreover, by minimizing the predicted final pretraining loss across learning rate schedules, we are able to find a schedule that outperforms the widely-used cosine learning rate schedule. Interestingly, this automatically discovered schedule bears some resemblance to the recently proposed Warmup-Stable-Decay (WSD) schedule (Hu et al, 2024) but achieves a slightly lower final loss. We believe these results could offer valuable insights for understanding the dynamics of pretraining and for designing learning rate schedules to improve efficiency.

Despite the popularity of Adam optimizer in practice, most theoretical analyses study SGD as a proxy and little is known about how the solutions found by Adam differ. In this paper, we show that Adam reduces a specific form of sharpness measure shaped by its adaptive updates, leading to qualitatively different solutions from SGD. When the training loss is small, Adam wanders around the manifold of minimizers and takes semi-gradients to minimize this sharpness measure in an adaptive manner, a behavior we rigorously characterize via a continuous-time approximation using stochastic differential equations. We further illustrate how this behavior differs from that of SGD in a well-studied setting: when training overparameterized models with label noise, SGD has been shown to minimize the trace of the Hessian matrix, $\text{tr}(\textbf{H})$, whereas we prove that Adam minimizes $\text{tr}(\text{diag}(\textbf{H})^{1/2})$ instead. In solving sparse linear regression with diagonal linear networks, Adam provably achieves better sparsity and generalization than SGD due to this difference. Finally, we note that our proof framework applies not only to Adam but also to a broad class of adaptive gradient methods, including but not limited to RMSProp, Adam-mini, and Adalayer. This provides a unified perspective for analyzing how adaptive optimizers reduce sharpness and may offer insights for future optimizer design.