Solving Hidden Monotone Variational Inequalities with Surrogate Losses
Ryan D'Orazio, Danilo Vucetic, Zichu Liu, Junhyung Lyle Kim, Ioannis Mitliagkas, Gauthier Gidel

TL;DR
This paper introduces a surrogate-based method for solving variational inequalities in deep learning, ensuring convergence and compatibility with existing optimizers, with applications in min-max problems and reinforcement learning.
Contribution
It presents a novel surrogate approach for VIs that guarantees convergence under realistic assumptions and unifies existing methods, compatible with deep learning optimizers.
Findings
Effective in min-max optimization tasks.
Reduces computational and sample complexity in deep reinforcement learning.
Provides theoretical convergence guarantees for the proposed method.
Abstract
Deep learning has proven to be effective in a wide variety of loss minimization problems. However, many applications of interest, like minimizing projected Bellman error and min-max optimization, cannot be modelled as minimizing a scalar loss function but instead correspond to solving a variational inequality (VI) problem. This difference in setting has caused many practical challenges as naive gradient-based approaches from supervised learning tend to diverge and cycle in the VI case. In this work, we propose a principled surrogate-based approach compatible with deep learning to solve VIs. We show that our surrogate-based approach has three main benefits: (1) under assumptions that are realistic in practice (when hidden monotone structure is present, interpolation, and sufficient optimization of the surrogates), it guarantees convergence, (2) it provides a unifying perspective of…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2025 Poster
- The extension of iterative surrogate optimization from the scalar to the variational inequality case is a significant contribution. - Paper offers a rigorous theoretical analysis. - Strong performance of the method compared to the TD0 baseline. - Well-written and relatively easy to follow.
- The empirical finding of better optimization of the inner problem not leading to better optimization of the outer loop is very interesting but unfortunately not examined in more detail. Both a more in-depth experimental investigation and a theoretical justification for this effect could strongly improve the paper, see also the questions below.
This paper has a strong originality in that it appears to be the first to extend this type of surrogate losses to VIs, and it does so in a way that provably takes advantage of hidden monotonicity/convexity structure. Importantly, this extension is nontrivial -- there is a simple and solid adversarial example the authors provide (Prop. 3.3) that shows a difficulty gap in comparison with surrogate losses in the scalar optimization case. I think there is the extra strength (though perhaps it isn't
I think the main (and only, to be honest) weakness of this paper is a weakness of presentation -- in particular, I feel that (as outlined in the "Strengths" section of my review above), the main contribution of this paper is that it clarifies and formalizes a framework where black-box scalar non convex optimization guarantees can be bootstrapped up to hidden-structure VI guarantees. However, at many points I felt that the presentation did not highlight this strongly enough, and instead chose to
The considered problem is important in the classical optimization context (i.e., constrained optimization, complementarity) and mordern ML where the loss is structured. The problem is also more general than minimizing a scalar loss usually showing up in supervised learning. The experiments show that the proposed method work fine in practice.
The paper is challenging to follow, particularly in its transition from problem (1) to the construction of the surrogate model, where additional discussion would be beneficial. The assumptions also seem overly restrictive. For instance, while assuming convexity of the loss with respect to the model's output is reasonable for most loss functions, the assumption that the constrained domain is convex feels unnecessarily limiting, even though the authors provide a few narrow examples. Furthermore, t
Videos
Taxonomy
TopicsOptimization and Packing Problems · Optimization and Variational Analysis · Contact Mechanics and Variational Inequalities
