The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Parallel Restarted SGD with Faster Convergence and Less Communication: Demystifying Why Model Averaging Works for Deep Learning
Open accessAbstract
In distributed training of deep neural networks, parallel minibatch SGD is widely used to speed up the training process by using multiple workers. It uses multiple workers to sample local stochastic gradients in parallel, aggregates all gradients in a single server to obtain the average, and updates each worker’s local model using a SGD update with the averaged gradient. Ideally, parallel mini-batch SGD can achieve a linear speed-up of the training time (with respect to the number of workers) compared with SGD over a single worker. However, such linear scalability in practice is significantly limited by the growing demand for gradient communication as more workers are involved. Model averaging, which periodically averages individual models trained over parallel workers, is another common practice used for distributed training of deep neural networks since (Zinkevich et al. 2010) (McDonald, Hall, and Mann 2010). Compared with parallel mini-batch SGD, the communication overhead of model averaging is significantly reduced. Impressively, tremendous experimental works have verified that model averaging can still achieve a good speed-up of the training time as long as the averaging interval is carefully controlled. However, it remains a mystery in theory why such a simple heuristic works so well. This paper provides a thorough and rigorous theoretical study on why model averaging can work as well as parallel mini-batch SGD with significantly less communication overhead.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Accurate, Large Minibatch SGD: Training ImageNet in 1 Hour
Goyal, P., Dollár, P., Girshick, R., Noordhuis, P., Wesolowski, L., Kyrola, A., Tulloch, A., Jia, Y., & He, K. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.02677 · Cited by 2,294
Cited by
Federated learning: Challenges, methods, and future directions
Li, T., Sahu, A. K., Talwalkar, A., & Smith, V. (2020) · IEEE Signal Processing Magazine · doi:10.1109/msp.2020.2975749 · Cited by 6,210
Adaptive Federated Learning in Resource Constrained Edge Computing Systems
Wang, S., Tuor, T., Salonidis, T., Leung, K. K., Makaya, C., He, T., & Chan, K. (2019) · IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · doi:10.1109/jsac.2019.2904348 · Cited by 2,232
A survey on federated learning
Zhang, C., Xie, Y., Bai, H., Yu, B., Li, W., & Gao, Y. (2021) · Knowledge-Based Systems · doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2021.106775 · Cited by 1,899
SCAFFOLD: Stochastic Controlled Averaging for Federated Learning
Karimireddy, S. P., Kale, S., Mohri, M., Reddi, S. J., Stich, S. U., & Suresh, A. T. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.06378 · Cited by 1,734
On the Convergence of FedAvg on Non-IID Data
Li, X., Huang, K., Yang, W., Wang, S., & Zhang, Z. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1907.02189 · Cited by 1,575
“Assumptions 3 and 4 have been made by the works (Zhang et al., 2013; Stich, 2018; Stich et al., 2018; Yu et al., 2019).”
Method
Metadata
- Authors
- Yu, H., Yang, S., & Zhu, S.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
- Published
- 2019-07-17
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 01
- Pages
- 5693-5700
- ISSN
- 2159-5399 (ISSN-L)
- 2374-3468
- OpenAlex
- W2900182564
- Cited by
- 497
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 26.54
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Parallel Restarted SGD with Faster Convergence and Less Communication: Demystifying Why Model Averaging Works for Deep Learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33015693
- The paper
- Yu, H., Yang, S., & Zhu, S. (2019). Parallel Restarted SGD with Faster Convergence and Less Communication: Demystifying Why Model Averaging Works for Deep Learning. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.33015693
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.