Relay-Assisted Federated Edge Learning: Performance Analysis and System Optimization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we study a relay-assisted federated edge learning (FEEL) network under latency and bandwidth constraints. In this network, <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$N$ </tex-math></inline-formula> users collaboratively train a global model assisted by <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$M$ </tex-math></inline-formula> intermediate relays and one edge server. We firstly propose partial aggregation and spectrum resource multiplexing at the relays in order to improve the communication of the relay-assisted FEEL system. Furthermore, we derive analytical and asymptotic expressions of the system outage probability and convergence rate. For the purpose of improving the system performance, we further optimize the relay-assisted FEEL network by maximizing the number of users who participate in each round of federated learning, through allocation of the wireless bandwidth among users and relays. Specifically, two bandwidth allocation (BA) schemes have been proposed, assuming either instantaneous or statistical channel state information (CSI). Simulations show the advantages of the proposed BA schemes over other benchmarks, regarding the accuracy and convergence rate of the considered relay-assisted FEEL network.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it