7.9LGMar 14, 2024
Learning from straggler clients in federated learningAndrew Hard, Antonious M. Girgis, Ehsan Amid et al.
How well do existing federated learning algorithms learn from client devices that return model updates with a significant time delay? Is it even possible to learn effectively from clients that report back minutes, hours, or days after being scheduled? We answer these questions by developing Monte Carlo simulations of client latency that are guided by real-world applications. We study synchronous optimization algorithms like FedAvg and FedAdam as well as the asynchronous FedBuff algorithm, and observe that all these existing approaches struggle to learn from severely delayed clients. To improve upon this situation, we experiment with modifications, including distillation regularization and exponential moving averages of model weights. Finally, we introduce two new algorithms, FARe-DUST and FeAST-on-MSG, based on distillation and averaging, respectively. Experiments with the EMNIST, CIFAR-100, and StackOverflow benchmark federated learning tasks demonstrate that our new algorithms outperform existing ones in terms of accuracy for straggler clients, while also providing better trade-offs between training time and total accuracy.
9.2LGNov 23, 2021
Jointly Learning from Decentralized (Federated) and Centralized Data to Mitigate Distribution ShiftSean Augenstein, Andrew Hard, Kurt Partridge et al.
With privacy as a motivation, Federated Learning (FL) is an increasingly used paradigm where learning takes place collectively on edge devices, each with a cache of user-generated training examples that remain resident on the local device. These on-device training examples are gathered in situ during the course of users' interactions with their devices, and thus are highly reflective of at least part of the inference data distribution. Yet a distribution shift may still exist; the on-device training examples may lack for some data inputs expected to be encountered at inference time. This paper proposes a way to mitigate this shift: selective usage of datacenter data, mixed in with FL. By mixing decentralized (federated) and centralized (datacenter) data, we can form an effective training data distribution that better matches the inference data distribution, resulting in more useful models while still meeting the private training data access constraints imposed by FL.
A Field Guide to Federated OptimizationJianyu Wang, Zachary Charles, Zheng Xu et al.
Federated learning and analytics are a distributed approach for collaboratively learning models (or statistics) from decentralized data, motivated by and designed for privacy protection. The distributed learning process can be formulated as solving federated optimization problems, which emphasize communication efficiency, data heterogeneity, compatibility with privacy and system requirements, and other constraints that are not primary considerations in other problem settings. This paper provides recommendations and guidelines on formulating, designing, evaluating and analyzing federated optimization algorithms through concrete examples and practical implementation, with a focus on conducting effective simulations to infer real-world performance. The goal of this work is not to survey the current literature, but to inspire researchers and practitioners to design federated learning algorithms that can be used in various practical applications.
18.6ASMay 21, 2020
Training Keyword Spotting Models on Non-IID Data with Federated LearningAndrew Hard, Kurt Partridge, Cameron Nguyen et al.
We demonstrate that a production-quality keyword-spotting model can be trained on-device using federated learning and achieve comparable false accept and false reject rates to a centrally-trained model. To overcome the algorithmic constraints associated with fitting on-device data (which are inherently non-independent and identically distributed), we conduct thorough empirical studies of optimization algorithms and hyperparameter configurations using large-scale federated simulations. To overcome resource constraints, we replace memory intensive MTR data augmentation with SpecAugment, which reduces the false reject rate by 56%. Finally, to label examples (given the zero visibility into on-device data), we explore teacher-student training.
28.6CLNov 8, 2018
Federated Learning for Mobile Keyboard PredictionAndrew Hard, Kanishka Rao, Rajiv Mathews et al.
We train a recurrent neural network language model using a distributed, on-device learning framework called federated learning for the purpose of next-word prediction in a virtual keyboard for smartphones. Server-based training using stochastic gradient descent is compared with training on client devices using the Federated Averaging algorithm. The federated algorithm, which enables training on a higher-quality dataset for this use case, is shown to achieve better prediction recall. This work demonstrates the feasibility and benefit of training language models on client devices without exporting sensitive user data to servers. The federated learning environment gives users greater control over the use of their data and simplifies the task of incorporating privacy by default with distributed training and aggregation across a population of client devices.