Optical Circuit Switches (OCS) make inter-pod wiring in AI clusters programmable, posing design questions on wiring choice, symmetry departure, and reconfigurations. We present a unified information-geometric framework to address these issues.A wiring is a point in a probability simplex over circuits within a degree polytope. Departure from a symmetric Fat-Tree prior q is measured by \DKL(⋅∥q). The cost U is the smoothed DAG critical-path length, whose gradient equals path marginals of a Gibbs distribution via forward--backward recursion.For free energy Fβ1=U+β1−1\DKL(⋅∥q), we prove well-posedness, monotonic dependence on β1, adaptation bounds via Jeffreys divergence, and a symmetry principle for static optimality. An entropic proximal-gradient method updates multiplicatively with a ∣V∣-dim dual KL projection, achieving linear convergence.For time-varying traffic, a threshold policy yields regret O(ΓCV1T) against the switching-free optimum. Traffic changes are detected by a multinomial GLR--CUSUM detector with non-asymptotic false-alarm bounds. Multi-job generalized-mean fairness aligns with α-fairness (α≥2). Experiments on pipeline, data, and MoE workloads validate the framework against integer programming.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Four views of interconnect topology. (a) A k=4 Fat-Tree with 4 pods, (k/2)2=4 core switches, 8 aggregation switches, 8 edge switches, and k3/4=16 hosts. All links are fixed at deployment. (b) NVIDIA Blackwell NVL72: GPUs are fully meshed within each rack via NVSwitch (blue links), and racks are interconnected through a hierarchical InfiniBand Fat-Tree reached through per-GPU NICs (red links). Only 6 of the 72 GPUs per rack are drawn. The topology is static. (c) An OCS-reconfigurable fabric realizes a logical torus (dashed orange; arrows indicate wrap-around links) whose wiring is reprogrammed per job. The thick orange circuit is an example cross-connect set inside the OCS, turning otherwise idle fibres into a long-range link. (d) Schematic information-geometric view (not to scale): wirings are points of the simplex Mtopo , and the degree polytope W is m -convex. The static symmetric wiring sits at the prior; an iterate w0∗ outside W (e.g. the multiplicative step ( 15 )) is mapped back by the KL projection w^=argminWDKL(⋅∥w0∗) ( Lemma 5.1 ). Other topology families are shown only for orientation; families with different switch sets are not, in general, points of the same simplex ( Remark 3.2 ).
β1→0 ( λ→∞ )
β1→∞ ( λ→0 )
Optimal wiring
qW (static symmetric prior)
min-KL minimiser of U on W
Cost U(wβ1⋆)
U(qW)
minWU
Linear rate of Theorem 5.4
fast, (1+ηλ)−1 small
slow, tends to sublinear
Table 1: Role of the inverse temperature β1 (cf. Theorem 4.3 ).
Fabric
N=16 pods, r=8 OCS ports/pod, c=50 GB/s per circuit, b0=10 GB/s, μ=56 ( 7/8 of the ports)
Job
S=4 pipeline stages ×D=4 data-parallel replicas, one pod per (stage, replica)
Compute
forward 80 ms, backward 160 ms per stage, optimiser 20 ms
Volumes
PP 3 GB per stage boundary and replica; ring all-reduce 10 GB per ring edge; MoE all-to-all 4GB×max(πj,πj′) between replicas j,j′ of a stage, expert popularity π=(0.4,0.3,0.2,0.1) unless stated
DAG
forward chain, backward chain, all-reduce of stage i after its backward pass
Smoothing
τ=τs=1 ms; prior q uniform over all (216)=120 pairs
Table 2: Default experimental parameters.
Figure 2: Convergence of Algorithm 1 for λ=1/β1∈{0.02,0.2,1} . (a) Objective gap (log scale). (b) DKL(w⋆∥wk) (solid) and the bound ∏i<k(1+ηiλ)−1DKL(w⋆∥q) of Theorem 5.4 (c) (dotted, same colour).
β1
monotone
bound viol.
final gap [s]
∣FMD−FCVX∣
λ=0.02
50
yes
0
1.5×10−4
4.4×10−9
λ=0.2
5
yes
0
9.3×10−8
solver failed
λ=1
1
yes
0
2.2×10−10
<10−12
Table 3: Checks of Theorem 5.4 (400 iterations from q ). “Bound viol.” is the largest excess of DKL(w⋆∥wk) over its bound; the last column is the difference to the CVXPY/Clarabel optimum.
Figure 3: Temperature sweep. (a) Smoothed iteration time of wβ1⋆ with the static and fully adaptive levels and the bound of Theorem 4.3 (iii). (b) KL departure from the prior with the bound of Theorem 4.3 (ii) and its limit DKL(w∘∥q) .
Figure 4: Integer wirings for MoE workloads: iteration time divided by the relaxation lower bound, as a function of the number of OCS ports per pod at fixed pod bandwidth.
N
workload
r
LB
Rnd
LS
MILP
tMD
tLS
tMILP
16
dense
4
1.307
1.979
1.650
1.447 (opt.)
26.4
9.4
0.09
16
dense
8
1.307
1.800
1.358
1.339 (opt.)
40.3
12.0
0.27
16
dense
16
1.307
1.326
1.314
1.314 (opt.)
27.1
18.4
0.35
16
dense
32
1.307
1.334
1.313
1.313 (opt.)
44.7
28.4
1.97
24
dense
4
1.898
2.568
2.239
2.064 (opt.)
37.5
18.3
0.22
24
dense
8
1.898
2.395
2.006
1.960 (opt.)
14.1
26.8
0.63
Table 4: Integer wirings. LB: relaxation bound; Rnd: Algorithm 1 + rounding; LS: + local search; MILP: exact (opt. = proven optimal). Times in seconds (single core, Python implementation for MD and LS).
Figure 5: Dynamic workload ( T=600 , C=1 s). (a) Excess iteration time over the dynamic oracle (log scale, 9-point moving average; vertical lines: abrupt changes). (b) Cumulative excess versus number of reconfigurations for each policy family; dashed lines have constant regret excess+CNT .
Policy
parameter
NT
excess
regret
static prior q
–
0
525.0
525.0
periodic k
3
199
84.1
283.1
10
59
83.1
142.1
30
19
129.8
148.8
100
5
182.4
187.4
∞ (once)
0
1282.0
1282.0
Table 5: Dynamic reconfiguration: number of reconfigurations, cumulative excess over the oracle and regret = excess +CNT (seconds; oracle total 853.7 s). Best regret per family in bold.
Figure 6: Multi-tenant OCS budget ( μ=36 ). (a) Slowdown of each job for increasing fairness exponent p and for a static proportional partition. (b) Maximum and mean slowdown; dotted lines show the static partition.
μ
p
s1
s2
s3
max
mean
shares ρ
52
1
1.114
1.062
1.063
1.114
1.080
0.26 / 0.42 / 0.32
2
1.110
1.065
1.065
1.110
1.080
0.27 / 0.42 / 0.31
4
1.105
1.068
1.067
1.105
1.080
0.27 / 0.42 / 0.31
8
1.099
1.071
1.071
1.099
1.080
0.28 / 0.41 / 0.31
∞
1.084
1.081
1.080
1.084
1.082
0.30 / 0.40 / 0.30
static partition
1.050
1.119
1.104
1.119
1.091
0.36 / 0.36 / 0.27
Table 6: Multi-tenant results: per-job slowdowns sk , maximum and mean slowdown, and budget shares ρk (dense / MoE-A / MoE-B).
The rapid growth of AI training has dramatically increased datacenter traffic demand and energy consumption, which has motivated renewed interest in optical circuit switches (OCSes) as a high-bandwidth, energy-efficient alternative for AI fabrics. Deploying multiple parallel OCSes is a leading alternative. However, efficiently scheduling time-varying traffic matrices across parallel optical switches with non-negligible reconfiguration delays remains an open challenge. We consider the problem of scheduling a single AI traffic demand matrix D over s parallel OCSes while minimizing the makespan under reconfiguration delay δ. Our algorithm Spectra relies on a three-step approach: Decompose D into a minimal set of weighted permutations; Schedule these permutations across parallel switches using load-aware assignment; then Equalize the imbalanced loads on the switches via controlled permutation splitting. Evaluated on realistic AI training workloads (GPT model and Qwen MoE expert routing) as well as standard benchmarks, Spectra vastly outperforms a baseline based on state-of-the-art algorithms, reducing schedule makespan by an average factor of 1.4× on GPT AI workloads, 2.7× on MoE AI workloads, and 2.4× on standard benchmarks. Further, the makespans achieved by Spectra consistently approach newly derived lower bounds.
Advanced AI reasoning systems route tasks through dynamic execution graphs of specialized agents. We identify a structural blind spot in this architecture: schedulers optimize load and fitness but lack a model of how failure propagates differently in tree-like versus cyclic graphs. In tree-like regimes, a single failure cascades exponentially; in dense cyclic regimes, it self-limits. A geometry-blind scheduler cannot distinguish these cases. We formalize this observability gap as an online geometry-control problem. We prove a cascade-sensitivity condition: failure spread is supercritical when per-edge propagation probability exceeds the inverse of the graph's branching factor (p > e^{-γ}, where γis the BFS shell-growth exponent). We close this gap with a spatio-temporal sidecar that predicts which routing geometry fits the current topology. The sidecar comprises (i) a Euclidean propagation scorer for dense, cyclic subgraphs, (ii) a hyperbolic scorer capturing exponential risk in tree-like subgraphs, and (iii) a compact learned gate (133 parameters) that blends the two scores using topology and geometry-aware features. On 250 benchmark scenarios spanning five topology regimes, the sidecar lifts the native scheduler's win rate from 50.4% to 87.2% (+36.8 pp). In tree-like regimes, gains reach +48 to +68 pp. The learned gate achieves held-out AUC = 0.9247, confirming geometry preference is recoverable from live signals. Cross-architecture validation on Barabasi-Albert, Watts-Strogatz, and Erdos-Renyi graphs confirms propagation modeling generalizes across graph families.
Distributed learning is widely used for training large models on large datasets by distributing parts of the model or dataset across multiple devices and aggregating the computed results for subsequent computations or parameter updates. Existing communication algorithms for distributed learning such as ring all-reduce result in heavy communication overhead between servers. Since communication in large-scale systems uses optical fibers, we propose an Optical In-Network-Computing (OptINC) architecture to offload the computation in servers onto the optical interconnects. To execute gradient averaging and quantization in the optical domain, we incorporate optical devices such as Mach-Zehnder-Interferometers (MZIs) into the interconnects. Such a de facto optical neural network (ONN) can effectively reduce the communication overhead in existing distributed training solutions. To reduce dataset complexity for training this neural network, a preprocessing algorithm implemented in the optical domain is also proposed. Hardware cost is lowered by approximating the weight matrices of the optical neural network with unitary and diagonal matrices, while the accuracy is maintained by a proposed hardware-aware training algorithm. The proposed solution was evaluated on real distributed learning tasks, including ResNet50 on CIFAR-100, and a LLaMA-based network on Wikipedia-1B. In both cases, the proposed framework can achieve comparable training accuracy to the ring all-reduce baseline, while eliminating communication overhead.
Sijie Fei, Grace Li Zhang, Bing Li +1
Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany · Technical University of Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany · Technical University of Ilmenau, Ilmenau, Germany