Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,234 studies31 sourcesUpdated 45 min ago
PreprintCC BY 4.0arXiv

Adversarial Training with Large Step Sizes: Implicit Bias, Optimization, and Sharpness

Abstract

Adversarial Training (AT) is an important method for improving model robustness. We study the dynamics of deterministic Gradient Descent (GD) in AT. Most existing works in this direction focus on the small or vanishing step sizes regime, where GD resembles a continuous-time flow. However, such step sizes can make training inefficient and are rarely used in practice. In this paper, we study the AT dynamics of GD with large constant step sizes. We first study GD in adversarial linear logistic regression, focusing on two aspects: where the model parameters converge (implicit bias) and how quickly the losses decrease (optimization). We then turn to neural networks training and study how the sharpness of losses evolve during AT. Our results advance the understanding of the behaviors of GD with large step sizes in AT and highlight three key differences from its behavior in Standard Training (ST): (i) the implicit bias gap between AT and ST, previously established only for small step sizes, persists for arbitrarily large constant step sizes, (ii) different from ST, there is no uniform rate of convergence for the optimization error in AT, and (iii) sharpness can exhibit two-stage dynamics that differ from the Edge-of-Stability behavior observed in ST.

Related

  1. Projected Primal–Dual Gradient Preference Optimization Under Category-Wise Split-Conformal Safety Constraints for Large Language Model Post-Training
    Haochen Jiang, Yulin Tu
    MathematicsPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0General mathematicsCrossref
  2. On the tradeoff between robustness and geometric accuracy in adversarial training
    Rachel Morris, Ryan Murray, Kerrek Stinson
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textAnalysis & PDEsarXiv
  3. Statistical Inference for Adversarial Training: Central Limit Theorems via Optimal Transport
    Kim Jakwang, Kwon Dohyun
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textProbabilityStatisticsarXiv
  4. Distributionally robust linear regression through the lens of adversarial training
    Elis Stefansson, David Vävinggren, Antônio H. Ribeiro
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textOptimisation & controlStatisticsarXiv
  5. Probabilistic Adversarial Training
    Andi Zhang, Xingyu Zhao, Siddartha Khastgir
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textStatisticsarXiv
BibTeX
@misc{feng2026adversarial,
  title = {{Adversarial Training with Large Step Sizes: Implicit Bias, Optimization, and Sharpness}},
  author = {Yi Feng and Andrea Paudice},
  howpublished = {arXiv},
  year = {2026},
  month = nov,
  doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2611.08457},
  eprint = {2611.08457},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08457},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - Adversarial Training with Large Step Sizes: Implicit Bias, Optimization, and Sharpness
AU  - Yi Feng
AU  - Andrea Paudice
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/11/05
PB  - arXiv
DO  - 10.48550/arxiv.2611.08457
UR  - https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08457
AB  - Adversarial Training (AT) is an important method for improving model robustness. We study the dynamics of deterministic Gradient Descent (GD) in AT. Most existing works in this direction focus on the small or vanishing step sizes regime, where GD resembles a continuous-time flow. However, such step sizes can make training inefficient and are rarely used in practice. In this paper, we study the AT dynamics of GD with large constant step sizes. We first study GD in adversarial linear logistic regression, focusing on two aspects: where the model parameters converge (implicit bias) and how quickly the losses decrease (optimization). We then turn to neural networks training and study how the sharpness of losses evolve during AT. Our results advance the understanding of the behaviors of GD with large step sizes in AT and highlight three key differences from its behavior in Standard Training (ST): (i) the implicit bias gap between AT and ST, previously established only for small step sizes, persists for arbitrarily large constant step sizes, (ii) different from ST, there is no uniform rate of convergence for the optimization error in AT, and (iii) sharpness can exhibit two-stage dynamics that differ from the Edge-of-Stability behavior observed in ST.
ER  -