Improving the Sample and Communication Complexity for Decentralized Non-Convex Optimization: Joint Gradient Estimation and Tracking

Part of Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning 1 pre-proceedings (ICML 2020)

Bibtex »Metadata »Paper »Supplemental »

Bibtek download is not availble in the pre-proceeding


Authors

Haoran Sun, Songtao Lu, Mingyi Hong

Abstract

Many modern large-scale machine learning problems benefit from decentralized and stochastic optimization. Recent works have shown that utilizing both decentralized computing and local stochastic gradient estimates can outperform state-of-the-art centralized algorithms, in applications involving highly non-convex problems, such as training deep neural networks. In this work, we propose a decentralized stochastic algorithm to deal with certain smooth non-convex problems where there are $m$ nodes in the system, and each node has a large number of samples (denoted as $n$). Differently from the majority of the existing decentralized learning algorithms for either stochastic or finite-sum problems, our focus is given to {\it both} reducing the total communication rounds among the nodes, while accessing the minimum number of local data samples. In particular, we propose an algorithm named D-GET (decentralized gradient estimation and tracking), which jointly performs decentralized gradient estimation (which estimates the local gradient using a subset of local samples) {\it and} gradient tracking (which tracks the global full gradient using local estimates). We show that, to achieve certain $\epsilon$ stationary solution of the deterministic finite sum problem, the proposed algorithm achieves an $\mathcal{O}(mn^{1/2}\epsilon^{-1})$ sample complexity and an $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^{-1})$ communication complexity. These bounds significantly improve upon the best existing bounds of $\mathcal{O}(mn\epsilon^{-1})$ and $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^{-1})$, respectively. Similarly, for online problems, the proposed method achieves an $\mathcal{O}(m \epsilon^{-3/2})$ sample complexity and an $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^{-1})$ communication complexity, while the best existing bounds are $\mathcal{O}(m\epsilon^{-2})$ and $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^{-2})$.