Good Papers

Learning Rate Matters: Vanilla LoRA May Suffice for LLM Fine-tuning

Vanilla LoRA matches variant performance within 1-2% when learning rates are tuned, and differing optimal rates stem from Hessian eigenvalue variations.

Yu-Ang Lee, Ching-Yun Ko, Pin-Yu Chen, Mi-Yen Yeh

Published 2026Sydney Poster Session 2 · Tue, Dec 8, 5:00 PM–8:00 PM local time · Hall 1-4▲ 7 on Hugging FaceCode ★ 13arXiv ↗OpenReview ↗

88%
OverallMust read
?
OverallMust readVote to see the scoreThe exact score shows once you've voted, so every vote is your own call. The first half of each home page shelf shows its scores.
Readers
–

Only vote on papers you've read. Sign in with GitHub to vote.

AI panel15/20reviewers recommend it
lenient 4/5
medium 9/10
strict 2/5
AI panel?Vote to see what the 20 AI reviewers said

Abstract

Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) is the prevailing approach for efficient large language model (LLM) fine-tuning. Building on this paradigm, recent studies have proposed alternative initialization strategies, architectural modifications, and optimization adjustments, reporting substantial improvements over vanilla LoRA. However, these gains are often demonstrated under fixed or narrowly tuned hyperparameter settings, despite the known sensitivity of neural networks to training configurations. In this work, we systematically re-evaluate nine representative LoRA variants alongside vanilla LoRA through extensive hyperparameter searches over learning rate, batch size, rank, and training duration. Across tasks spanning mathematical reasoning, commonsense reasoning, code generation, and instruction following at diverse model scales, we find that different LoRA methods favor distinct learning rate ranges. Crucially, once learning rates are properly tuned, all methods achieve similar peak performance (within 1-2%), with only subtle rank-dependent behaviors. These results suggest that vanilla LoRA remains a competitive baseline and that improvements reported under a single training configuration may not reflect consistent methodological advantages. Finally, a second-order analysis attributes the differing optimal learning rate ranges to variations in the largest Hessian eigenvalue, aligning with classical learning theories.