MDA: Availability-Aware Federated Learning Client Selection
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Recently, a new distributed learning scheme called Federated Learning (FL) has been introduced. FL is designed so that server never collects user-owned data meaning it is great at preserving privacy. FL's process starts with the server sending a model to clients, then the clients train that model using their data and send the updated model back to the server. Afterward, the server aggregates all the updates and modifies the global model. This process is repeated until the model converges. This study focuses on an FL setting called cross-device FL, which trains based on a large number of clients. Since many devices may be unavailable in cross-device FL, and communication between the server and all clients is extremely costly, only a fraction of clients gets selected for training at each round. In vanilla FL, clients are selected randomly, which results in an acceptable accuracy but is not ideal from the overall training time perspective, since some clients are slow and can cause some training rounds to be slow. If only fast clients get selected the learning would speed up, but it will be biased toward only the fast clients' data, and the accuracy degrades. Consequently, new client selection techniques have been proposed to improve the training time by considering individual clients' resources and speed. This paper introduces the first availability-aware selection strategy called MDA. The results show that our approach makes learning faster than vanilla FL by up to 6.5%. Moreover, we show that resource heterogeneity-aware techniques are effective but can become even better when combined with our approach, making it faster than the state-of-the-art selectors by up to 16%. Lastly, our approach selects more unique clients for training compared to client selectors that only select fast clients, which reduces our technique's bias.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 22 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Nov 2022.
Builds on
14 of 22 references.
References · 14
- 2016Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Datacited by 7,669
- 2019Advances and Open Problems in Federated Learningcited by 3,046
- 2019Federated Learning: Challenges, Methods, and Future Directionscited by 1,538
- 2020Adaptive Federated Optimizationcited by 1,046
- 2019Towards Federated Learning at Scale: System Designcited by 832
- 2018LEAF: A Benchmark for Federated Settingscited by 792
- 2019Federated Learning in Mobile Edge Networks: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 408
- 2018Client Selection for Federated Learning with Heterogeneous Resources in Mobile Edgecited by 352
- 2020FedML: A Research Library and Benchmark for Federated Machine Learningcited by 300
- 2020Client Selection in Federated Learning: Convergence Analysis and Power-of-Choice Selection Strategiescited by 198
- 2020TiFL: A Tier-based Federated Learning Systemcited by 96
- 2019SAFA: a Semi-Asynchronous Protocol for Fast Federated Learning with Low Overheadcited by 82
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.