MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385575065 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2023.3302067

Redundancy Management in Federated Learning for Fast Communication

2023· article· en· W4385575065 on OpenAlexaff
Azadeh Motamedi, Sangseok Yun, Jae‐Mo Kang, Yiqun Ge, Il‐Min Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsHuawei Technologies (Canada)Queen's University
FundersHuawei Technologies
KeywordsRetransmissionRedundancy (engineering)Computer scienceDecoding methodsNetwork packetWirelessError detection and correctionCyclic redundancy checkReal-time computingBaseline (sea)Machine learningComputer networkArtificial intelligenceComputer engineeringAlgorithmTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most critical challenges of federated learning (FL) is to send data efficiently and reliably over the noisy wireless channels between the clients and server to achieve target learning accuracy as fast as possible. To achieve this goal, we design effective error correction coded FL with managed retransmissions. Rather than using Shannon capacity as the performance measure to design the communication mechanisms for FL, our approach relies critically on learning accuracy. Our fundamental idea is based on the observation that Stochastic Gradient Decent (SGD) and its family can tolerate some errors in the course of training. Inspired by this, to reduce the communication burden without degrading the learning accuracy, our FL framework with Managed Redundancy (FL-MR) has two phases: (i) the No-Retransmission phase, where retransmissions are never performed even in case of erroneous decoding of data and (ii) the Select Retransmission phase, where only some carefully selected data packets are retransmitted. Our extensive simulation results demonstrate that the proposed coded FL system achieves target accuracies much faster than the baseline coded approach.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0200.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207