A Comparative Study of Federated Learning Aggregation Algorithms under Non-IID Conditions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61173/3tt0br21Keywords:
Non-IID Data, Federated Averaging, Feder-ated Proximal, Stochastic Controlled AveragingAbstract
Privacy can be maintained in collaborative model training by enabling clients to contribute without exposing their local datasets, as supported by Federated Learning (FL). Performance-wise, however, in scenarios involving non-IID data across clients, training becomes significantly more complex and less reliable, as is often the case with real-world datasets. In this work, we provide a comprehensive comparative review of three popular aggregation algorithms in FL: Federated Averaging (FedAvg), Federated Proximal (FedProx) and Stochastic Controlled Averaging (SCAFFOLD). Among these baselines, FedAvg is the fundamental approach, FedProx adds the proximal term to suppress the drift of clients and SCAFFOLD utilizes control variates to adjust the updating directions of local clients. According to the related work, FedAvg, which is communication-efficient, is unstable and slow on non-IID data. FedProx stabilizes convergence, and SCAFFOLD has the best convergence performance, but it has to exchange control variates to solve them, thus consuming more communication. While no algorithm appears to dominate for all metrics, it underscores the significance of choosing FL strategy which can meet certain trade-off between accuracy, speed of convergence and communication expense.
References
[1] P. M. Mammen. Federated Learning: Opportunities and Challenges. arXiv: arXiv:2101.05428.
[2] J. Alekseenko, A. Karargyris, and N. Padoy. Distance- Aware Non-IID Federated Learning for Generalization and Personalization in Medical Imaging Segmentation. Medical Imaging with Deep Learning, Paris, France, 03-05 juillet 2024.
[3] J. Wang, Q. Liu, H. Liang, G. Joshi, and H. V. Poor. Tackling the Objective Inconsistency Problem in Heterogeneous Federated Optimization. arXiv: arXiv:2007.07481.
[4] H. B. McMahan, E. Moore, D. Ramage, S. Hampson, and B. A. y Arcas. Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Data. arXiv: arXiv:1602.05629.
[5] W. Huang, Z. Cai, Y. Shi, and T. Suzuki. Understanding Convergence and Generalization in Federated Learning through Feature Learning Theory. The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations. 2023.
[6] T. Li, A. K. Sahu, M. Zaheer, M. Sanjabi, A. Talwalkar, and V. Smith. Federated Optimization in Heterogeneous Networks. arXiv: arXiv:1812.06127.
[7] S. P. Karimireddy, S. Kale, M. Mohri, S. J. Reddi, S. U. Stich, and A. T. Suresh. SCAFFOLD: Stochastic Controlled Averaging for Federated Learning. arXiv: arXiv:1910.06378.
[8] W. Guo, F. Zhuang, X. Zhang, Y. Tong, and J. Dong. A Comprehensive Survey of Federated Transfer Learning: Challenges, Methods and Applications. arXiv: arXiv:2403.01387.
[9] F. Varno, M. Saghayi, L. R. Sevyeri, S. Gupta, S. Matwin, and M. Havaei. AdaBest: Minimizing Client Drift in Federated Learning via Adaptive Bias Estimation. European Conference on Computer Vision, vol. 13683, 2022, pp. 710–726.
[10] D. M. J. G et al. Non-IID data in Federated Learning: A Systematic Review with Taxonomy, Metrics, Methods, Frameworks and Future Directions. arXiv: arXiv:2411.12377.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 by the authors.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
