Near-Optimal Resilient Aggregation Rules for Distributed Learning Using 1-Center and 1-Mean Clustering with Outliers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Byzantine machine learning has garnered considerable attention in light of the unpredictable faults that can occur in large-scale distributed learning systems. The key to secure resilience against Byzantine machines in distributed learning is resilient aggregation mechanisms. Although abundant resilient aggregation rules have been proposed, they are designed in ad-hoc manners, imposing extra barriers on comparing, analyzing, and improving the rules across performance criteria. This paper studies near-optimal aggregation rules using clustering in the presence of outliers. Our outlier-robust clustering approach utilizes geometric properties of the update vectors provided by workers. Our analysis show that constant approximations to the 1-center and 1-mean clustering problems with outliers provide near-optimal resilient aggregators for metric-based criteria, which have been proven to be crucial in the homogeneous and heterogeneous cases respectively. In addition, we discuss two contradicting types of attacks under which no single aggregation rule is guaranteed to improve upon the naive average. Based on the discussion, we propose a two-phase resilient aggregation framework. We run experiments for image classification using a non-convex loss function. The proposed algorithms outperform previously known aggregation rules by a large margin with both homogeneous and heterogeneous data distributions among non-faulty workers. Code and appendix are available at https://github.com/jerry907/AAAI24-RASHB.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".