machine learning platform developers

Abstract: Semantic watermarking schemes such as Tree-Ring hide a detectable pattern in the initial noise latent of a diffusion model. Recent work shows these watermarks are not only removable but forgeable: an attacker who never sees the watermarking key can still produce images the genuine detector accepts. We reproduce the Reprompt forgery attack of Müller et al. against Tree-Ring on Stable Diffusion XL, using the authors' released code, on free-tier dual T4 GPUs with 14.6 GB of usable memory per device, substantially less per-GPU memory than the A40 hardware used in the original study. The attack reproduces. Over six trials of three arms we detect genuine images 6/6, clean images 0/6, and forged images 5/6, at 325-332 s per attack. Three further results came out of running it under constraint. The released detector computes a non-central $χ^2$ statistic and hands back only its CDF, so we recovered the discarded statistic; our recovery matches the released detector exactly, and two natural scores built from it separate the forged arm from the clean null at AUC 0.861 and 0.972 on the same eighteen observations. Running SDXL in half precision requires patching the pipeline's direct autoencoder calls, and a controlled probe confirms the patched path leaves the detector statistic unchanged. Finally, we report a prediction we made from reading the detector source that our measurements then contradicted. The notebook, the pinned fork and every measurement artifact are released with the paper.

Abstract: Federated learning over IEEE~802.11 shares the wireless channel among clients that send model updates. We use ns-3 to measure the frame-delivery ratio and saturation throughput for different client densities and offered loads. A separate FedAvg trainer uses the frame-delivery ratio as a first-order proxy for the update-admission probability and uses an equation to estimate communication time. The method does not simulate the delivery of a complete model update or measure end-to-end training time. Across 720 evaluated runs with two datasets, two data partitions, six client densities, six offered loads, and five seeds, all runs reached their predefined target accuracy within the round budget. Rounds-to-target changed little with offered load, while communication time-to-target increased by about two orders of magnitude across the client-density range. A Bianchi-anchored estimator produced a mean absolute percentage error from $2.3\%$ to $10.2\%$ on held-out configurations. This error is measured against communication time constructed from the same round-duration equation, not against independently measured completion time. We also compare uniform participation with persistent heterogeneous participation. The study does not detect a statistically distinguishable excluded-class accuracy gap over five seeds, but the confidence intervals are wide. The results apply only to the evaluated configurations and do not provide a general convergence or fairness guarantee.

Abstract: The learning-rate schedule is a consequential choice in training deep networks, yet the policies in common use are heuristic, and published comparisons are hard to read, because architecture, dataset, and budget tend to vary alongside the schedule. We study BrachistoneLR, a schedule built by mapping the vertical coordinate of the brachistochrone, the curve of fastest descent under gravity, onto the range between a peak and a floor rate. Expanding the definition shows it to be cosine annealing with the half-period set to E - 1 instead of E, the configuration a standard implementation gives when its period argument is one less than the number of epochs. The rate therefore reaches its floor at the last epoch trained rather than one epoch later, and we show this difference decays as E^-2, making it a short-horizon effect. We then benchmark six schedules over 72 runs on three image classification datasets (MNIST, Fashion-MNIST, CIFAR-10) and four architecture families (fully connected, convolutional, recurrent, residual), fixing the optimizer, data pipeline, and evaluation protocol so that only the schedule varies. Schedules that fall smoothly from peak to floor beat the constant rate and calendar-based decay by margins that grow with task difficulty, reaching 2.5 points of dataset mean on CIFAR-10. Within that leading group, BrachistoneLR, cosine annealing, and warmup-cosine lie within 0.06 accuracy points and 0.17 of a mean rank, which one seed per configuration cannot separate. BrachistoneLR is best on both residual networks and has the highest CIFAR-10 mean, and it sets no milestones, decay factor, warmup length, or restart period. We conclude that the shape of a schedule matters more than its parameterization, that the choice of whether to use a smooth schedule matters more than the choice among them, and that the terminal-rate distinction is worth attention only over short horizons.