OCD-FL: A Novel Communication-Efficient Peer Selection-Based Decentralized Federated Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The conjunction of edge intelligence and the ever-growing Internet-of-Things (IoT) network heralds a new era of collaborative machine learning, with federated learning (FL) emerging as the most prominent paradigm. With the growing interest in these learning schemes, researchers started addressing some of their most fundamental limitations. Indeed, conventional FL with a central aggregator presents a single point of failure and a network bottleneck. To bypass this issue, decentralized FL where nodes collaborate in a peer-to-peer network has been proposed. Despite the latter's efficiency, communication costs and data heterogeneity remain key challenges in decentralized FL. In this context, we propose a novel scheme, called opportunistic communication-efficient decentralized federated learning, a.k.a., OCD-FL, consisting of a systematic FL peer selection for collaboration, aiming to achieve maximum FL knowledge gain while reducing energy consumption. Experimental results demonstrate the capability of OCD-FL to achieve similar or better performances than the fully collaborative FL, while significantly reducing consumed energy by at least 5% and up to 80%.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".