  The overall performance or expected excess risk of an iterative machine
learning algorithm can be decomposed into training error and generalization
error. While the former is controlled by its convergence analysis, the latter
can be tightly handled by algorithmic stability. The machine learning community
has a rich history investigating convergence and stability separately. However,
the question about the trade-off between these two quantities remains open. In
this paper, we show that for any iterative algorithm at any iteration, the
overall performance is lower bounded by the minimax statistical error over an
appropriately chosen loss function class. This implies an important trade-off
between convergence and stability of the algorithm -- a faster converging
algorithm has to be less stable, and vice versa. As a direct consequence of
this fundamental tradeoff, new convergence lower bounds can be derived for
classes of algorithms constrained with different stability bounds. In
particular, when the loss function is convex (or strongly convex) and smooth,
we discuss the stability upper bounds of gradient descent (GD) and stochastic
gradient descent and their variants with decreasing step sizes. For Nesterov's
accelerated gradient descent (NAG) and heavy ball method (HB), we provide
stability upper bounds for the quadratic loss function. Applying existing
stability upper bounds for the gradient methods in our trade-off framework, we
obtain lower bounds matching the well-established convergence upper bounds up
to constants for these algorithms and conjecture similar lower bounds for NAG
and HB. Finally, we numerically demonstrate the tightness of our stability
bounds in terms of exponents in the rate and also illustrate via a simulated
logistic regression problem that our stability bounds reflect the
generalization errors better than the simple uniform convergence bounds for GD
and NAG.
