arXiv preprint ·

EGGROLL, Unrolled: Understanding and Improving Low-Rank Evolution Strategies at Scale

Ege C. Kaya and Abolfazl Hashemi

Published
Source
arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
Original
Read it at arXiv
Topics
Machine LearningArtificial IntelligenceOptimization & Control

Abstract

EGGROLL makes evolution strategies (ES) practical for LLMs by replacing dense Gaussian weight perturbations with low-rank Gaussian products, often of rank one. This choice is computationally attractive but geometrically severe: each rank-one perturbation lies in a zero-volume subset of the ambient matrix space, despite having identity covariance. We characterize the mean EGGROLL update field at finite rank and nonzero perturbation radii, then analyze the error of its finite-population estimator. The population field is obtained by applying an explicit resolvent to the gradient of the objective smoothed by the perturbations. We show that the resolvent can introduce a nonconservative component and can reverse the local stability of an optimum. EGGROLL is nevertheless exact on every quadratic objective at every rank and radius. For smooth objectives, its first local finite-rank correction is $O(σ^2/r)$, and nonasymptotic bounds control the resulting field error under smoothness assumptions. Under a local affine model, rank-one perturbations increase the variance of the gradient estimator by only $\frac{2(m+n+1)}{mn+1}$ relative to dense Gaussian ES, or $0.098\%$ for a $4096\times4096$ matrix. We then introduce LOO-ROLL, a leave-one-out estimator that preserves the finite-rank population field while replacing EGGROLL's two antithetic evaluations per direction by one. At equal evaluation cost, LOO-ROLL halves estimator MSE in transformer blocks. At matched wall time across ten post-training settings and models up to 8B parameters, LOO-ROLL improves seven outcomes in individual paired tests, with no significant loss. On the GSM8K test set, accuracy increases from $38.1\%$ to $63.0\%$ at 0.6B and from $65.9\%$ to $80.0\%$ at 8B. Transformer measurements recover the predicted finite-rank variance, while the rank comparisons show no reproducible reward-based advantage for rank eight.

The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.

Read it on ReadSearch

Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.

Already a reader? Sign in

All new papers in Machine Learning

Get the few papers worth your time in Machine Learning every morning.

ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.

Papers belong to their authors and publishers; every page here links to the original. All research topics