I disagree that the blog post was explicit enough. Tacking parenthesized disclaimers onto the end of your sentences is not really very explicit. What they're co

I disagree that the blog post was explicit enough. Tacking parenthesized disclaimers onto the end of your sentences is not really very explicit. What they're comparing against isn't even Adam; calling it Adam at all is misleading. The subtitle of the Adam paper is "A Method for Stochastic Optimization". It's not designed or intended for full-batch, non-stochastic training. What they should do is lead that paragraph with the fact that this is full-batch, note that this is not normal, and explain why they chose to do it anyway. And they shouldn't call it plain "Adam". The paper is probably good, and it's fine to test things in toy settings, but you need to be upfront with your assumptions and limitations.