Cited by 38Privacy-Preserving Technologies in DataDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsStochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques

On the Convergence of Decentralized Federated Learning Under Imperfect Information Sharing

Open access
Chellapandi, Vishnu Pandi, Upadhyay, Antesh, Hashemi, Abolfazl, Żak, Stanislaw H·2023·IEEE Control Systems Letters

Abstract

Most of the current literature focused on centralized learning is centered around the celebrated average-consensus paradigm and less attention is devoted to scenarios where the communication between the agents may be imperfect. This paper presents three different algorithms of Decentralized Federated Learning (DFL) in the presence of imperfect information sharing modeled as noisy communication channels. The first algorithm, Federated Noisy Decentralized Learning (FedNDL1) comes from the literature, where the noise is added to the algorithm parameters to simulate the scenario of the presence of noisy communication channels. This algorithm shares parameters to form a consensus with the clients based on a communication graph topology through a noisy communication channel. The proposed second algorithm (FedNDL2) is similar to the first algorithm but with added noise to the parameters and it performs the gossip averaging before the gradient optimization. The proposed third algorithm (FedNDL3), on the other hand, shares the gradients through noisy communication channels instead of the parameters. Theoretical and experimental results show that under imperfect information sharing, the third scheme that mixes gradients is more robust in the presence of a noisy channel compared with the algorithms from the literature that mix the parameters.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/lcsys.2023.3290470

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Federated Learning and blockchain have emerged as promising solutions to address challenges of decentralized data-sharing.

    “Several decentralized data-sharing technologies and techniques, such as Federated Learning (FL) [10] and blockchain [11], have emerged as promising solutions to address these challenges.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chellapandi, V. P., Upadhyay, A., Hashemi, A., & Żak, S. H.
Affiliations
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
  • College of Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA
Venue
IEEE Control Systems Letters
Published
2023
Volume
7
Pages
2982-2987
ISSN
2475-1456 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4382365395
Cited by
38
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 8
FWCI
3.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Control Systems Letters (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Distributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Stochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques
Keywords
decentralized federated learning, noisy channels, consensus algorithms, gradient averaging, parameter averaging, convergence analysis, communication topology, distributed optimization

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