MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Joint Optimization of Resource Allocation and Topology Formation for Hierarchical Federated Learning in Smart Grids

2024· article· en· W4408324632 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Savadkoohian, Ha Minh Nguyen, Kim Khoa Nguyen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceJoint (building)Distributed computingResource allocationTopology (electrical circuits)Topology optimizationResource management (computing)Resource (disambiguation)Computer networkEngineeringFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hierarchical Federated Learning (HFL) presents a promising approach for addressing communication challenges inherent in traditional FL methodologies, particularly critical in resource-constrained environments such as Smart Grids (SG). In this paper, we delve into the potential of HFL tailored to the clustered structure of typical SG use-cases such as load forecasting, particularly in scenarios characterized by high communication time and energy constraints. We propose a novel optimization model that jointly tackles topology formation and resource allocation in HFL. Unlike prior works, our model handles an unknown number of layers, allowing for flexible adaptation to different grid configurations. We solve this non-convex optimization model by an approximation method that separates clustering from resource allocation. Clustering is addressed using complete-linkage clustering and Voronoi diagrams, while resource allocation is tackled through approximations and convexification of the problem. Furthermore, we introduce a Deep Q-Network (DQN) based reinforcement learning approach that addresses the joint optimization problem in near real-time. Simulation results demonstrate that the hierarchical architecture with efficient resource allocation significantly reduces energy consumption in smart grid sensor nodes compared to traditional FL, while meeting response time requirements. In addition, our DQN solution achieves near-optimal performance, making it particularly appropriate for large-scale grids.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207