MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010781917 · doi:10.1109/tac.2020.2981035

Asynchronous Gradient Push

2020· article· en· W3010781917 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsynchrony (computer programming)Asynchronous communicationIterated functionConvergence (economics)Regular polygonMulti-agent systemConvex functionDistributed algorithmConvex optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a multiagent framework for distributed optimization where each agent has access to a local smooth strongly convex function, and the collective goal is to achieve consensus on the parameters that minimize the sum of the agents' local functions. We propose an algorithm wherein each agent operates asynchronously and independently of the other agents. When the local functions are strongly convex with Lipschitz-continuous gradients, we show that the iterates at each agent converge to a neighborhood of the global minimum, where the neighborhood size depends on the degree of asynchrony in the multiagent network. When the agents work at the same rate, convergence to the global minimizer is achieved. Numerical experiments demonstrate that asynchronous gradient push can minimize the global objective faster than the state-of-the-art synchronous first-order methods, is more robust to failing or stalling agents, and scales better with the network size.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automatic ControlSame topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207