Cited by 184Privacy-Preserving Technologies in DataStochastic Gradient Optimization TechniquesDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems

Decentralized Federated Learning With Unreliable Communications

Open access
Ye, Hao, Liang, Le, Li, Geoffrey Ye·2022·IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing

Abstract

Decentralized federated learning, inherited from decentralized learning, enables the edge devices to collaborate on model training in a peer-to-peer manner without the assistance of a server. However, existing decentralized learning frameworks usually assume perfect communication among devices, where they can reliably exchange messages,e.g., gradients or parameters. But the real-world communication networks are prone to packet loss and transmission errors. Transmission reliability comes with a price. The commonly-used solution is to adopt a reliable transportation layer protocol,e.g., transmission control protocol (TCP), which however leads to significant communication overhead and reduces connectivity among devices that can be supported. For a communication network with a lightweight and unreliable communication protocol, user datagram protocol (UDP), we propose a robust decentralized stochastic gradient descent (SGD) approach, called Soft-DSGD, to address the unreliability issue. Soft-DSGD updates the model parameters with partially received messages and optimizes the mixing weights according to the link reliability matrix of communication links. We prove that the proposed decentralized training system, even with unreliable communications, can still achieve the same asymptotic convergence rate as vanilla decentralized SGD with perfect communications. Moreover, numerical results confirm the proposed approach can leverage all available unreliable communication links to speed up convergence.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/jstsp.2022.3152445

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 31 · Cited by 184

Authors
Ye, H., Liang, L., & Li, G. Y.
Affiliations
  • Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
  • Purple Mountain Laboratories (CN)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
Venue
IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing
Published
2022-04
Volume
16
Issue
3
Pages
487-500
ISSN
  • 1932-4553 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-0484
OpenAlex
W3192649393
Cited by
184
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 59 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 4
FWCI
13.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Stochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Distributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Keywords
decentralized federated learning, unreliable communication, packet loss, UDP, mixing weights, convergence rate, edge devices, peer learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review