LGNov 5, 2025
FedSparQ: Adaptive Sparse Quantization with Error Feedback for Robust & Efficient Federated LearningChaimaa Medjadji, Sadi Alawadi, Feras M. Awaysheh et al.
Federated Learning (FL) enables collaborative model training across decentralized clients while preserving data privacy by keeping raw data local. However, FL suffers from significant communication overhead due to the frequent exchange of high-dimensional model updates over constrained networks. In this paper, we present FedSparQ, a lightweight compression framework that dynamically sparsifies the gradient of each client through an adaptive threshold, applies half-precision quantization to retained entries and integrates residuals from error feedback to prevent loss of information. FedSparQ requires no manual tuning of sparsity rates or quantization schedules, adapts seamlessly to both homogeneous and heterogeneous data distributions, and is agnostic to model architecture. Through extensive empirical evaluation on vision benchmarks under independent and identically distributed (IID) and non-IID data, we show that FedSparQ substantially reduces communication overhead (reducing by 90% of bytes sent compared to FedAvg) while preserving or improving model accuracy (improving by 6% compared to FedAvg non-compressed solution or to state-of-the-art compression models) and enhancing convergence robustness (by 50%, compared to the other baselines). Our approach provides a practical, easy-to-deploy solution for bandwidth-constrained federated deployments and lays the groundwork for future extensions in adaptive precision and privacy-preserving protocols.
29.7LGMay 20
Optimized Federated Knowledge Distillation with Distributed Neural Architecture SearchChaimaa Medjadji, Sylvain Kubler, Yves Le Traon et al.
Federated Learning (FL) enables collaborative model training without centralizing data. However, real-world deployments must simultaneously address statistical heterogeneity across client data (non-IID), system heterogeneity in device capabilities, and communication efficiency. Existing FL approaches mitigate these challenges through improved aggregation, personalization, or knowledge distillation, but they almost universally assume a fixed client architecture, limiting adaptability to heterogeneous data complexity and hardware constraints. This architectural constraint often leads to suboptimal trade-offs between accuracy and efficiency in real-world FL systems. This work introduces FedKDNAS, a distillation-driven FL framework that combines client-side neural architecture selection with distillation of server-coordinated knowledge. Each client autonomously selects a lightweight model under accuracy-resource constraints. It then trains it locally using a hybrid objective combining supervised learning and knowledge distillation and shares only predictions on a public reference set. The server then aggregates and smooths these predictions, optionally combining them with a teacher model, to produce stable distillation targets for the next round. Extensive evaluation on six datasets against six representative FL baselines (FedAvg, Ditto, FedMD, FedDF, FedDistill, Local-KD) demonstrates that FedKDNAS consistently achieves superior Pareto efficiency, improving accuracy by up to 15\% under non-IID conditions, reducing client CPU usage by approximately 28\%, and decreasing communication overhead by up to 44 times while maintaining lightweight logit-based communication.
21.8LGMay 15
Centralized vs Decentralized Federated Learning: A trade-off performance analysisChaimaa Medjadji, Guilain Leduc, Sylvain Kubler et al.
Federated Learning (FL) has emerged as a promising paradigm for collaborative model training across distributed edge devices while preserving data privacy especially with the huge increase amount of data due to the adoption of technologies which contributes to the growing number of IoT devices. Storing this amount of data centrally is challenging due to issues like limited communication, privacy, and regulations. FL can be Centralized (CFL), Decentralized (DFL), and Semi-decentralized (SDFL). Choosing the right FL architecture depends on the application's needs. However, very few research studies have experimentally compared these three types of architectures to not only understand the respective strengths and limitations, but also trade-offs between different performance indicators. This paper overcome this lack of analysis, conducting experimental analyses using the Fedstellar simulator, MNIST dataset, and MLP classifier.