ArticleScientific reports2025
A dual enhanced stochastic gradient descent method with dynamic momentum and step size adaptation for improved optimization performance.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In modern machine learning, optimization algorithms are crucial; they steer the training process by skillfully navigating through complex, high-dimensional loss landscapes. Among these, stochastic gradient descent with momentum (SGDM) is widely adopted for its ability to accelerate convergence in shallow regions. However, SGDM struggles in challenging optimization landscapes, where narrow, curved valleys can lead to oscillations and slow progress. This paper introduces dual enhanced SGD (DESGD), which addresses these limitations by dynamically adapting both momentum and step size on the same update rules of SGDM. In two optimization test functions, the Rosenbrock and Sum Square functions, the suggested optimizer typically performs better than SGDM and Adam. For example, it accomplishes comparable errors while achieving up to 81–95% fewer iterations and 66–91% less CPU time than SGDM and 67–78% fewer iterations with 62–70% quicker runtimes than Adam. On the MNIST dataset, the proposed optimizer achieved the highest accuracies and lowest test losses across the majority of batch sizes. Compared to SGDM, they consistently improved accuracy by about 1–2%, while performing on par with or slightly better than Adam in accuracy and error. Although SGDM remained the fastest per-step optimizer, our method’s computational cost is aligned with that of other adaptive optimizers like Adam. This marginal increase in per-iteration overhead is decisively justified by the substantial gains in model accuracy and reduction in training loss, demonstrating a favorable cost-to-performance ratio. The results demonstrate that DESGD is a promising practical optimizer to handle scenarios demanding stability in challenging landscapes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.