Papers for

distributed computing teams

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Decentralized learning consensus depends on network and data sizes

Population Scaling or Data Dilution? Dynamics of Local Topology Evolution in Decentralized Learning

Abstract: Scaling decentralized learning changes not only the number of clients $N$, but also the dynamics of information propagation and consensus. We argue that the effect of increasing $N$ cannot be understood in isolation, because data allocation, topology-dependent mixing, and communication capacity may change simultaneously. We study these coupled effects on CIFAR-10 with $N\in\{10,50,100,200\}$, comparing a degree-two Ring, a Static Random graph, and Local-First Heuristic Evolution (LFHE), a locally adaptive topology process based on friend-of-friend discovery. The Ring provides an analytically transparent failure mode: its Metropolis spectral gap decays as $Θ(N^{-2})$, implying progressively slower contraction of model disagreement as the population grows. Experiments show that holding the nominal local dataset size fixed substantially reduces the apparent population penalty observed when a fixed total dataset is divided among more clients. The remaining degradation depends strongly on communication structure: Ring enters a high-disagreement regime, whereas Static Random and LFHE remain close to consensus. Increasing LFHE's degree threshold further improves accuracy and consensus, but at a substantially higher model-transmission cost. These results show that decentralized scaling is governed by coupled learning and communication dynamics, rather than by the number of clients alone.

Sun 4 OctMachine LearningArtificial Intelligence
The gist
When many computers learn together without a central boss, how they share information and agree on what they learn can change a lot as more computers join. The authors studied this by changing the number of computers and the way they connect and share data. They found that simply adding more computers can slow down how quickly they agree unless the amount of data per computer stays the same. Different network designs also affect how well the group reaches agreement, with some setups working better and faster than others. This means that scaling up these systems needs careful balancing of data, connections, and communication.
Open → 2610.05476v1

Privacy-preserving analytics improved with identity verification methods

On the Usage of Verifiable Credentials in Privacy-Preserving Federated Analytics

Abstract: Privacy-Preserving Federated Analytics enables multiple nodes to collaboratively derive statistical insights without exchanging raw data. However, ensuring node authenticity and data validation (avoiding concerns such as identity tracking, data linkage, or data leakage) remain fundamental challenges. This paper offers some insights into the feasibility of defining an authenticated, integrity-preserving data model by coupling FPPA with Verifiable Credentials defined within the Self-Sovereign Identity framework.

Sat 26 SeptCryptography and SecurityEmerging Technologies
The gist
Sometimes, many computers want to work together to learn things from their combined data without sharing the actual data. This can be tricky when you want to make sure who is sending data and that the data is correct, without risking privacy or leaks. The authors looked at whether using special digital ID cards, called Verifiable Credentials, can help prove identities and keep data intact during this process. They connect these ID cards with a method called Federated Privacy-Preserving Analytics to see if it all works safely and reliably.
Open → 2609.33004v1

Quantum network policies cut resource needs and improve success rates

Learning and interpreting policies for simultaneous entanglement requests in quantum networks

Abstract: Future quantum networks will make use of entanglement to perform numerous tasks, such as sending quantum information over long distances, distributed quantum computing, and quantum sensing. In general, these tasks will need to be performed simultaneously in various regions of a network, while minimizing resources and latency. We will thus require policies for scheduling link-level entanglement resources, and using the link-level entanglement to create various forms of multipartite entanglement required for every task. In this work, we address this problem using reinforcement learning. We formulate a Markov Decision Process for the problem and use double deep Q-networks (DQN) with Message Passing Neural Networks (MPNNs), experience replay buffers, and curriculum training to obtain policies. The key physical parameter is the probability of link-level entanglement generation, i.e., the link activation probability. We show that our policies maintain 100% success for up to 71% lower link activation probability than the baseline heuristics for a set of physically relevant network topologies. We then examine an additional constraint where experiment (task) placements are restricted to specific hardware types and demonstrate a similar advantage in performance over heuristics, with our policy maintaining at least an 80% success rate for up to a 59% lower link activation probability. Finally, we explore methods to interpret the learned policy by defining metrics enabling conclusions to be drawn about the model's behavior and by tasking a large language model (LLM) to derive a novel heuristic given example actions taken by the DQN-trained policy. We find that the LLM heuristic performs similarly to the DQN-trained policy in performance, indicating a promising method for interpretable policy extraction for large quantum networks, where direct training becomes computationally expensive.

Thu 24 SeptMachine Learning
The gist
Quantum networks use a special kind of connection called entanglement to do important jobs like sending information and shared computing. The authors studied how to best manage these connections so many jobs can happen at once without wasting resources or causing delays. They created smart computer programs that learn good scheduling policies and work better than simple rules, especially when conditions get harder. They also found ways to explain how their programs decide what to do, making the technology easier to understand and trust.
Open → 2609.30157v1