大模型能超越传统的超参数优化算法吗?
Can LLMs Beat Classical Hyperparameter Optimization Algorithms?

原始链接: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.24647

本研究旨在评估大语言模型(LLM)智能体在超参数优化(HPO)任务中是否能够超越 CMA-ES 和 TPE 等经典算法。研究人员利用“autoresearch”框架发现,尽管 LLM 可以修改训练代码,但在追踪优化状态方面表现吃力,在受限情况下始终无法达到经典方法的水平。 为解决这一问题,作者提出了 Centaur,这是一种混合方法,将 CMA-ES 的结构化、可解释状态(均值向量、步长和协方差)与 LLM 的领域知识相结合。Centaur 的表现优于纯 LLM 智能体和经典算法,即便是仅有 0.8B 参数的小型模型也能取得优异结果。 研究结论指出,目前 LLM 最有效的角色是作为经典优化器的补充,而非替代品。尽管无约束的代码编辑是可行的,但若要达到传统 HPO 技术的效率与稳定性,则需要规模显著更大的模型。

近期的一场 Hacker News 讨论探讨了大语言模型(LLM)是否能超越传统的超参数优化(HPO)算法。 尽管一些参与者认为,与 TPE 等低成本的传统方法相比,大语言模型仅能提供边际价值,但目前形成的共识倾向于认为**混合方法**更具优势。支持者指出,大语言模型带来了启发式的“直觉”和模式识别能力,而传统算法则提供了大语言模型所欠缺的严谨搜索与规划能力。通过将两者结合——即利用大语言模型来引导搜索或演化启发式规则,同时由传统方法处理数学优化——研究人员可以获得比单一方法更好的性能。 此次讨论强调了这一混合理念在现实世界中的积极应用,包括优化量子电路、通过多智能体协作加速推理,以及自动化编译器代码布局的启发式算法。总之,虽然大语言模型本身难以完全取代传统优化器,但将其集成到优化框架中,已成为解决复杂问题的一种强大(尽管资源密集)策略。
相关文章

原文

View a PDF of the paper titled Can LLMs Beat Classical Hyperparameter Optimization Algorithms? A Study on autoresearch, by Fabio Ferreira and 4 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:The autoresearch repository enables an LLM agent to optimize hyperparameters by editing training code directly. We use it as a testbed to compare classical HPO algorithms against LLM-based methods on tuning the hyperparameters of a small language model under a fixed compute budget. When defining a fixed search space over autoresearch, classical methods such as CMA-ES and TPE consistently outperform LLM-based agents, where avoiding out-of-memory failures matters more than search diversity. Allowing the LLM to directly edit source code narrows the gap to the classical methods but does not close it, even with frontier models available at the time of writing such as Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview. We observe that LLMs struggle to track optimization state across trials. In contrast, classical methods lack the domain knowledge of LLMs. To combine the strengths of both, we introduce Centaur, a hybrid that shares CMA-ES's interpretable internal state, including mean vector, step-size, and covariance matrix, with an LLM. Centaur achieves the best result in our experiments, and a 0.8B LLM already suffices to outperform all classical and pure LLM methods. Unconstrained code editing requires larger models to be competitive with classical methods. We further analyze search diversity, model scaling from 0.8B to frontier models, and ablate the fraction of LLM-proposed trials in Centaur. All in all, our results suggest that LLMs are most effective as a complement to classical optimizers, not as a replacement.
Code is available at this https URL & interactive demo at this https URL.
From: Fabio Ferreira [view email]
[v1] Wed, 25 Mar 2026 17:29:40 UTC (1,874 KB)
[v2] Sun, 29 Mar 2026 18:46:53 UTC (2,456 KB)
[v3] Sat, 4 Apr 2026 10:33:34 UTC (3,843 KB)
[v4] Mon, 13 Apr 2026 21:59:37 UTC (3,768 KB)
[v5] Fri, 17 Apr 2026 18:50:51 UTC (3,905 KB)
联系我们 contact @ memedata.com