mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Critical Damping as a Momentum Schedule: Multi-Seed Validation, a Hybrid Recipe, and an Exhaustive Negative Result on Surgical Layer Selection

arXiv 2603.28921 ↗First posted 30 Mar 2026cs.LG cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The critical damping condition of the damped harmonic oscillator model of SGD with momentum (Qian, 1999) yields a momentum schedule with no tuned hyperparameters: mu(t) = 1 - 2*sqrt(alpha(t)). Across five seeds on ResNet-18/CIFAR-10 (200-epoch cosine schedule) it reaches 90% test accuracy 2.34x faster than constant mu=0.9 (range 1.71-2.86x, 5/5 seeds, one-sided paired t-test p=4e-4), at the cost of a real final-accuracy deficit of 0.46 pp (5/5 seeds, p=0.009). A short-schedule control rules out a schedule-length artifact: compressed baselines either pay 0.5-0.9 pp of accuracy or stay slower to 90% at equal accuracy. A hybrid recipe -- critical-damping momentum until 90%, then constant mu=0.9 -- removes the deficit and keeps the speedup: 95.45 +/- 0.05% final accuracy at 2.4x faster progress to 90% (n=5). The speedup generalizes across architectures (VGG-16 without skip connections: 1.72x, n=3); on CIFAR-100 early gains persist (2-4x to mid-training thresholds) but the accuracy cost grows (-1.7 pp), compressing the accuracy-matched gain to 1.14x. We also report an exhaustive negative result on surgical layer selection. Version 2 of this paper claimed that gradient attribution on misclassified images selects which layers to retrain; running the identical correction protocol on all 35 combinations of 3-of-7 layer groups ranks the selected triple 11th of 35 (exact p=0.31) -- no better than random. What survives is weaker but real: combinations containing the top-ranked layer outperform the rest (+6.2 vs -1.4 mean net error reduction), and the bottom of the gradient-norm ranking reliably predicts the most harmful interventions (down to -20 net errors). Gradient attribution on errors is a harm-avoidance signal, not a selector of repair targets. We release the full 35-combination landscape as a baseline for layer-selection claims.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Mar 2026.

Builds on

16 of 26 references.

References · 16

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2016Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networkscited by 4,718
  3. 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,609
  4. 2022Mass-Editing Memory in a Transformercited by 976
  5. 2015Cyclical Learning Rates for Training Neural Networkscited by 627
  6. 2017The Marginal Value of Adaptive Gradient Methods in Machine Learningcited by 248
  7. 2022Surgical Fine-Tuning Improves Adaptation to Distribution Shiftscited by 205
  8. 2015A Differential Equation for Modeling Nesterov's Accelerated Gradient Method: Theory and Insightscited by 203
  9. 2018Understanding the Acceleration Phenomenon via High-Resolution Differential Equationscited by 68
  10. 2017YellowFin and the Art of Momentum Tuningcited by 16
  11. 2023The Marginal Value of Momentum for Small Learning Rate SGDcited by 16
  12. 2019Demon: Improved Neural Network Training with Momentum Decaycited by 11
4 more
  1. 2021Training Deep Neural Networks with Adaptive Momentum Inspired by the Quadratic Optimizationcited by 8
  2. 2025From SGD to Spectra: A Theory of Neural Network Weight Dynamicscited by 8
  3. 2026Adaptive Momentum and Nonlinear Damping for Neural Network Trainingcited by 3
  4. 2025Hierarchical Alignment: Surgical Fine-Tuning via Functional Layer Specialization in Large Language Modelscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.