Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

Frozen Factor or Spectral Band? Disentangling Two Choices in Low-Rank LoRA

Adnan Slimane Ali, Ayoub Belfatmi, David Ngwe PouthPublished Oct 5, 2026
arXiv PDF
Researcher verdict
Context only
Use as context only
Benchmark evidence
Missing
Not verified yet
Time to first repro
A few days
Plan setup time
Risk flags
2
Review before use

Abstract

Domain fit: Niche / domain-specific · No strong AI-core implementation/artifact signals were detected from current providers.

Spectral variants of low-rank adaptation (LoRA) choose both a subspace and which factor to freeze. We separate these choices by freezing the input factor A or output factor B on the top or bottom singular directions of pretrained weights, with learning rates selected separately. At rank 2, the same-band advantage of freezing A is larger than either within-factor band difference on all four task-model pairs with complete comparisons. Freezing B also trails comparable-budget free LoRA by 8-18 percentage points on five pairs spanning a formatting task and OpenBookQA. The A-frozen advantage persists in a single-GPU-model replication and within individual MLP module groups, including controls with equal or greater trainable counts for B frozen, and when A is frozen on a random orthonormal basis. The factor contrast weakens with rank. On OpenBookQA / Qwen2.5-1.5B at rank 16, PEFT's MiCA implementation trails comparable-budget LoRA by 3.08 points under a shared training recipe transferred from the MiCA paper. A trained oracle output subspace largely removes the low-rank deficit; partial warm-up gains recur across three direction seeds. The factor-versus-band ordering is descriptive; an approximate multiplicity audit weakens several earlier significance claims. These results extend known factor asymmetry by showing how its magnitude depends on spectral placement, rank and training conditions.

Results and benchmarks

Freshness tier: warm
Spectral variants of low-rank adaptation (LoRA) choose both a subspace and which factor to freeze.

Implementation

No direct implementation yet

Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.

Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.

Implementation evidence summary
Confidence: low

Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.

Reproduction risks
  • Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow

Reproduction readiness

Time to first repro: days
Last checked: Oct 11, 2026

No repo

No verified implementation available

  • No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.

Hardware requirements

  • Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.

Hugging Face artifacts

No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.

Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.

Research context

Tasks

None detected

Methods

LoRA / Parameter-efficient tuning

Domains

None detected

Evaluation and human feedback data

Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.

Open in HFEPX
Explore similar papers

Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.