Federated Composite Optimization based on Douglas-Rachford splitting and variance reduction


Abstract

Federated Learning (FL) is a rapidly evolving distributed machine learning technique that involves a vast number of user devices. Local stochastic gradient descent (local-SGD) has received much attention and been extensively studied in FL to alleviate the communication bottleneck. However, the heterogeneity of data and the stochastic gradient induce high variance, leading to significant deviations in clients' local models. This results in slow and unstable convergence of the global model and increases communication overhead. To address this problem, recent work proposed various variance reduction schemes. In this paper, we propose a novel communication-efficient FL algorithm, Feddr-VR, which leverages the Douglas-Rachford (DR) splitting method and variance reduction to address the federated composite optimization (FCO) problem across heterogeneous data, where the objective function includes a possibly non-smooth regularization term. More specifically, for convex loss functions, we prove a sublinear convergence rate of O ( 1 k ) " role="presentation" style="position: relative;"> O ( 1 k ) O ( 1 k ) \mathcal{O}\left ( \frac{1}{k} \right ) . In addition, for strongly convex loss functions, our proposed algorithm achieves linear convergence towards a neighborhood of a first-order optimal solution. Moreover, Feddr-VR is highly practical, as it requires tuning only the step size. Finally, our numerical experiments reveal the effectiveness of our suggested algorithm in handling heterogeneous data and achieving communication efficiency.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].