Papers for

distributed machine learning engineers

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.

Improving asynchronous machine learning optimization across varied data is hard

Bridging the Gap Between Homogeneous and Heterogeneous Asynchronous Optimization Is Surprisingly Difficult

Abstract: Modern large-scale machine learning tasks often require multiple workers, devices, CPUs, or GPUs to compute stochastic gradients in parallel and asynchronously to train model weights. Theoretical results typically distinguish between two settings: (i) the homogeneous setting, where all workers have access to the same data distribution, and (ii) the heterogeneous setting, where each worker operates on different data distributions. Known optimal time complexities in these settings reveal a significant gap, with far more pessimistic guarantees in the heterogeneous case. In this work, we investigate whether these pessimistic optimal time complexities can be overcome under different assumptions. Surprisingly, we show that improvement is provably impossible under widely used first- and second-order similarity assumptions for any randomized algorithm. We then turn to the interpolation regime and demonstrate that the weak interpolation assumption alone is also insufficient. Finally, we introduce a minimal combination of irreducible assumptions, strong interpolation and the local Polyak-Lojasiewicz condition, to derive a new time complexity bound that matches the dependence on worker computation times in the best-known result in the homogeneous setting, without requiring identical data distributions.

Tue 15 SeptMachine Learning
The gist
Training machine learning models often involves many workers processing data at the same time but with different data. Theory shows it's much harder to get good training speed when workers have different data than when they share the same data. The authors found that under common assumptions, you cannot do better than existing worst-case guarantees for this harder case. They also discovered that only by combining very strong conditions can one achieve training speeds close to the simpler shared data situations.
Open 2609.17483v1

Federated learning design improves client gains without hurting performance

Pathwise Individual Rationality in Federated Learning: A Mechanism-Architecture Co-Design

Abstract: Participation in federated learning (FL) comes at a cost. Clients trade off privacy, communication, and compute costs for potentially greater gains in model efficacy. This paper explores this tradeoff under the aegis of individual rationality (IR) versus autarky, the basic game-theoretic requirement that the federation provide utility no worse than local training. Using the above as the design target, we examine pathwise performance of FL, as a per-round bound on cumulative surplus, not just as an asymptotic equilibrium guarantee under different models of client data distribution heterogeneity. Along this path, clients can remain below their local-training baseline for hundreds of rounds. The natural remedy is to cap each client's per-round contribution so that this shortfall stays bounded, and we prove that it backfires, collapsing learning even at low-to-modest heterogeneity. We then propose a novel design that combines short-term participation guarantees with personalized model evaluation, while maintaining fair incentives. We provide a theoretical basis for this new approach and empirically demonstrate that clients can avoid short-term losses without harming overall performance, even under moderate data distribution heterogeneity; under severe heterogeneity, the design shows promising outcomes for clients compared to their local baseline at some cost in accuracy.

Sun 13 SeptMachine LearningComputer Science and Game Theory
The gist
Federated learning lets many devices or users train a shared model without sharing their private data, but joining this process can cost clients in privacy and computing. The authors study how to make sure clients don't lose out compared to training alone, especially early on when learning is unstable. They find that simply limiting clients’ contributions to avoid losses can stop learning altogether. Instead, they propose a new approach that guarantees clients won't lose immediately and fairly measures their personal progress, helping clients avoid short-term losses while keeping good overall results.
Open 2609.14591v1