Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The paper investigates the impact of optimizer choice on neural network behavior in financial time series forecasting, specifically S\&P 500 volatility. Despite achieving similar out-of-sample error, different optimizers lead to qualitatively different learned functions, affecting non-linear response profiles and temporal dependencies. These functional differences manifest in significant variations in Sharpe ratio and portfolio turnover, highlighting the optimizer's role as a critical inductive bias.
Identical prediction accuracy in financial time series can mask a 3x dispersion in portfolio turnover, revealing how optimizer choice acts as a hidden prior that dramatically alters model behavior.
Neural networks applied to financial time series operate in a regime of underspecification, where model predictors achieve indistinguishable out-of-sample error. Using large-scale volatility forecasting for S$\&$P 500 stocks, we show that different model-training-pipeline pairs with identical test loss learn qualitatively different functions. Across architectures, predictive accuracy remains unchanged, yet optimizer choice reshapes non-linear response profiles and temporal dependence differently. These divergences have material consequences for decisions: volatility-ranked portfolios trace a near-vertical Sharpe-turnover frontier, with nearly $3\times$ turnover dispersion at comparable Sharpe ratios. We conclude that in underspecified settings, optimization acts as a consequential source of inductive bias, thus model evaluation should extend beyond scalar loss to encompass functional and decision-level implications.
