LoDAdaC: a unified local training-based decentralized framework with adaptive gradients and compressed communication
Authors: Wei Liu, Anweshit Panda, Ujwal Pandey, Haven Cook, George M. Slota, Naigang Wang, Jie Chen, Yangyang Xu
Organizations: Department of Mathematical Sciences, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute · Department of Computer Science, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute · IBM T. J. Watson Research Center · MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab, IBM Research
In the decentralized distributed learning, achieving fast convergence and low communication cost is essential for scalability and high efficiency. Adaptive gradient methods, such as Adam, have demonstrated strong practical performance in deep learning and centralized distributed settings. However, their convergence properties remain largely unexplored in decentralized settings involving multiple local training steps, such as federated learning. To address this limitation, we propose LoDAdaC, a unified multiple Local Training (MLT) Decentralized framework with Adam-type updates and Compressed communication (CC). LoDAdaC accommodates a broad class of optimizers for its local adaptive updates, including AMSGrad, Adam, and AdaGrad; it is compatible with standard (possibly biased) compressors such as low-bit quantization and sparsification. MLT and CC enable LoDAdaC to achieve multiplied reduction of communication cost, while the technique of adaptive updates enables fast convergence. We rigorously prove the combined advantage through complexity analysis. In addition, experiments on image classification and GPT-style language model training validate our theoretical findings and show that LoDAdaC significantly outperforms existing decentralized algorithms in terms of convergence speed and communication efficiency.
Figures & tables
MLT Methods
CC
AG
#Iter
CommCost
MLTsave
CCsave
PD-SGD ( Ge and Chang, 2023 )
✗
✗
nϵ41
nKϵ41
✓
−
LSGT ( Li et al., 2019 )
✗
✗
nϵ41
nKϵ41
✓
−
DFedAvgM ( Sun et al., 2022 )
✓
✗
max{ϵ4K,s2Kϵ4}∗
max{ϵ41−s,s2(1−s)ϵ4}∗
✗
✓
SQuARM-SGD ( Singh et al., 2021 )
✓
✗
nϵ41
nKϵ41−η
✓
✓
LM-DFL ( Chen et al., 2024 )
✓
✗
max{K3ϵ41,ϵ4K3s4}∗
max{K4ϵ41−s,ϵ4(1−s)K2s4}∗
✗
✗
LoDAdaC (this paper)
✓
✓
nϵ41
nKϵ41−η
✓
✓
Table 1: Comparison between the proposed method and selected approaches that use MLT for nonconvex decentralized distributed learning. “CC” indicates whether compressed communication is employed; “AG” denotes the use of adaptive gradient updates; “#Iter” specifies the number of total iterations (per agent) to obtain an ϵ -stationary point of problem ( 2 ), see Definition 1.2 ; “CommCost” refers to the total communication cost, where each communication round incurs a unit cost in the absence of compression; “MLTsave” indicates whether the number of communication rounds can be theoretically reduced by employing MLT; and “CCsave” reflects whether the total communication cost can be effectively reduced by compression. Here, the O(⋅) notation is omitted in the table, ϵ is assumed to be sufficiently small, and the number of local steps K is at most O(ϵ−1) . ∗s refers to the compression error given in ( Sun et al., 2022 ) , satisfying EQ[∥x−Q[x]∥2]≤s2d .
Optimizer
Description
Vanilla SGD
β1=0 and rt≡0 , i.e., uit=0 for all i and t
Momentum (Heavy-ball) SGD
β1∈(0,1) and rt≡0 , i.e., uit=0 for all i and t
AMSGrad
uit=β2uit−1+(1−β2)git∘git , uit=max{uit−1,uit} , ui−1=0 , and β2∈(0,1)
Adam
uit=β2uit−1+(1−β2)git∘git , with β2∈[TK+1TK,1)
Adam-mini
uit=β2uit−1+(1−β2)mean(git∘git) , with β2∈[TK+1TK,1)
Averaged AdaGrad
uit=t+11∑s=0tgis∘gis
Table 2: Representative optimizers of Algorithm 1 with specific selections of β1 and rt
Figure 1: Optimizer Comparison: Plotted above are the training loss, test accuracy, and consensus error of CIFAR-10 (top) and the training loss, validation loss, and consensus error of tiny-shakespeare (bottom) with training done on all of the various optimizers.
Figure 2: Number of Local Updates: Plotted above are the training loss, test accuracy, and consensus error of CIFAR-10 (top) and the training loss, validation loss, and consensus error of tiny-shakespeare (bottom) with training done using the Adam optimizer across a number of possible K values from 1 to 50.
Figure 3: Communication Volume: Plotted above are the training loss, test accuracy, and consensus error of CIFAR-10 (top) and the training loss, validation loss, and consensus error of tiny-shakespeare (bottom) with training done using the Adam optimizer across a number of possible K and top- k values.
Figure 4: Larger Agent Counts and Differing Topology: Plotted above are the training loss, test accuracy, and consensus error of CIFAR-10 with training done using the Adam optimizer when scaling to 4, 9, and 16 agents on ring topology (top) and 2D grid topology (bottom). All experiments were run with K=20 local updates per communication round.
Figure 5: Non-IID Data: Plotted above are the training loss, test accuracy, and consensus error when using the Adam optimizer on CIFAR-10 with non-IID data across K values from 1 to 50. We distribute data following a standard Dirichlet distribution process using α=1.0 (top) and α=0.5 (bottom).
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 6: Convergence performance for FashionMNIST: Plotted above are the training loss and test accuracy of FashionMNIST. The top row compares optimizer performance with Top- k 30% compression and a local update count of K=20 . The middle row demonstrates the reduction in communication rounds based on the number of local updates with Top- k compression of 30%. The bottom row compares the total communication volume scaled relative to the uncompressed baseline with no local updates.
Figure 7: Additional optimizer comparisons: Plotted above are accuracy (for FashionMNIST and CIFAR-10) and validation loss (for tiny-shakespeare) for the tested optimizers across a range of local update counts K . For each subplot, FashionMNIST is on the right, CIFAR-10 is in the middle, and tiny-shakespeare is on the right.
Figure 8: Additional number of local updates comparisons: Plotted above are accuracy (for FashionMNIST and CIFAR-10) and validation loss (for tiny-shakespeare) using AdaGrad (left) and AMSGrad (right), comparing across a range of local update values K .
Figure 9: Additional Top- k compression comparisons: Plotted above are accuracy (for FashionMNIST and CIFAR-10) and validation loss (for tiny-shakespeare) using Adam (left), AdaGrad (middle), and AMSGrad (right), comparing across a range of Top- k compression values.
Figure 10: Additional Scaling Results: Plotted above are the training loss, test accuracy, and consensus error of CIFAR-10 when scaling to 4, 9, and 16 agents using ring topology and 2D grid topology with the AdaGrad and AMSGrad optimizers. All experiments were run with K=20 local updates per communication round.
Communication-efficient pre-training of LLMs is increasingly important as training draws on compute distributed across clusters, data centers, and lower-bandwidth links. Many practical methods reduce communication frequency but still rely on synchronous All-Reduce operations that maintain identical model states and tie progress to global collectives. This can become a bottleneck when bandwidth or worker speed is heterogeneous. We introduce GASLoC, a novel decentralized pre-training algorithm that generalizes the notion of communication acceleration to the recently popular "outer optimizer" to allow a practical gossip-based training framework that is compatible with adaptive optimizers, allows for local optimizer steps, and can utilize sparse randomized peer communication. Empirically, on a number of standard LLM training tasks, we demonstrate that GASLoC outperforms state-of-the-art decentralized algorithms in single step per communication setting for a number of topologies and, unlike existing decentralized methods in the LLM setting, it allows to obtain performance competitive with DiLoCo when utilizing multiple local steps. In the heterogeneous bandwidth setting we demonstrate the advantage of GASLoC showing that it can significantly outperform DiLoCo.
Pietro Cagnasso, Eugene Belilovsky, Edouard Oyallon
Concordia University · Mila · CNRS, Sorbonne University
Reducing communication in derivative-free decentralized learning requires controlling the disagreement accumulated over multiple local updates. This paper develops SPADE-DFL, a primal--dual method that allows the number of local function-value updates between neighbor exchanges to grow with the computation budget while preserving the nonprivate convergence order. For smooth nonconvex objectives under uniform query-moment bounds, the prescribed nonprivate schedule achieves a time-averaged stationarity and consensus bound of O(T−1/3) using only Θ(T2/3) communication rounds, where T is the number of local updates per client. For private training, the accumulated data-dependent increment is isolated from the graph correction, allowing one protected state per client and round to generate all outgoing messages. We prove client-level differential privacy for the full interactive transcript and quantify the resulting optimization error over a finite horizon. Experiments on four classification tasks show that SPADE-DFL achieves higher mean test accuracy than existing decentralized learning methods.
Mengli Wei, Mengkai Zhu, Jiawen Chen +2
School of Mathematics, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China
Decentralized intelligence systems with heterogeneous devices and limited coordination increasingly rely on decentralized federated learning (DFL). However, DFL suffers from convergence inefficiency under data heterogeneity due to the use of a uniform learning rate (LR) that ignores layer-specific optimization needs. Foundational layers are responsible for maintaining network consensus, while specialized layers adapt to local data characteristics, leading to conflicting gradients and degraded performance under non-IID conditions. To address this fundamental tension, this work introduces FedA2L, a method that dynamically adjusts layer-wise LRs based on model divergence signals. By leveraging local update intensity and network consensus constraints, FedA2L seamlessly integrates into existing DFL protocols without additional communication or coordination. Extensive evaluations across DFL algorithms, various model architectures, and datasets demonstrate that FedA2L achieves up to 4.94 times faster convergence than vanilla DFL and reduces communication rounds by up to 59% compared to scheduler-based baselines. Furthermore, FedA2L exhibits resilience to severe data heterogeneity, larger network sizes, and sparse topologies, reducing communication overhead and establishing it as a versatile optimization tool for resource-constrained or large-scale distributed learning in edge and IoT deployments. The code is released at https://github.com/nclabteam/FedA2L.
Van Truong Vo, Khoa Nguyen, Taehong Kim
School of Information and Communication Engineering, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, South Korea