Strategic Optimization of Convergence and Energy in Federated Learning Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Federated Learning (FL) is a Machine Learning (ML) paradigm in which multiple devices collaboratively train a model without sharing their local data. This decentralized approach provides significant privacy benefits, enabling compliance with data protection regulations and safeguarding sensitive user information by keeping raw data on local devices. Instead of transmitting raw data, FL sends model updates to a central aggregator to improve the global model. However, this process can result in higher Carbon Dioxide (CO₂) emissions compared to traditional centralized ML systems, due to the increased number of participating devices and communication rounds. This study evaluates the performance, convergence speed, energy efficiency, and environmental impact of FL models compared to centralized models, using the Modified National Institute of Standards and Technology dataset (MNIST) and Canadian Institute for Advanced Research-10 classes dataset (CIFAR-10). Four models were tested: two FL models and two centralized models. The evaluation focused on accuracy, number of training rounds to convergence, and total CO₂ emissions. To optimize both convergence and energy efficiency, a dynamic hill-climbing-based early stopping technique was introduced. After every 100 rounds, model accuracy improvements were assessed, and training was terminated early if further gains fell below a shrinking threshold, effectively reducing unnecessary computation and energy consumption. Results show that, under the tested conditions, FL models achieved competitive or higher accuracy than centralized models, particularly on non-Independent and Identically Distributed (IID) data distributions. For example, the federated MNIST model reached 98.79% accuracy with a significantly lower carbon footprint when early stopping was applied. Overall, the proposed optimization approach reduced CO₂ emissions by approximately 60% without substantial loss in accuracy. By integrating privacy preservation, explicit regulatory relevance, and a practical dynamic optimization method, this research demonstrates that FL can deliver strong model performance while meeting modern requirements for data privacy and environmental sustainability
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".