Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Kumar Kshitij Patel

dblp:239/8754 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
11ranked-venue papers
4as first author
6since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-6886-6826ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 11 · 4 first-author · 6 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
9 papers
Optimization for machine learning · 62% Efficient and distributed learning · 30% Learning theory · 6%
Theoretical computer science
3 papers
Mathematical optimization · 90% Approximation and online algorithms · 10%

Topics — the 23 heaviest of 23, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
distributed optimization
2.142024
The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent Communication · COLT 2024
A Stochastic Newton Algorithm for Distributed Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2021
Minibatch vs Local SGD for Heterogeneous Distributed Learning · NeurIPS 2020
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › distributed training › communication-efficient distributed SGD
local SGD
1.632024
The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent Communication · COLT 2024
Is Local SGD Better than Minibatch SGD? · ICML 2020
Don't Use Large Mini-batches, Use Local SGD · ICLR 2020
Mathematical optimization
stochastic optimization
1.422025
Revisiting Consensus Error: A Fine-grained Analysis of Local SGD under Second-order Data Heterogeneity · NeurIPS 2025
Towards Optimal Communication Complexity in Distributed Non-Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › stochastic gradient descent
minibatch SGD
1.222024
The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent Communication · COLT 2024
Is Local SGD Better than Minibatch SGD? · ICML 2020
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic gradient descent
0.922024
The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent Communication · COLT 2024
Don't Use Large Mini-batches, Use Local SGD · ICLR 2020
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic optimization
0.922021
A Stochastic Newton Algorithm for Distributed Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2021
Communication trade-offs for Local-SGD with large step size · NeurIPS 2019
Mathematical optimization
convergence analysis
0.912025
Revisiting Consensus Error: A Fine-grained Analysis of Local SGD under Second-order Data Heterogeneity · NeurIPS 2025
Mathematical optimization
distributed optimization
0.912025
Revisiting Consensus Error: A Fine-grained Analysis of Local SGD under Second-order Data Heterogeneity · NeurIPS 2025
Mathematical optimization › distributed optimization
federated optimization
0.912025
Revisiting Consensus Error: A Fine-grained Analysis of Local SGD under Second-order Data Heterogeneity · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
distributed training
0.822020
Don't Use Large Mini-batches, Use Local SGD · ICLR 2020
Communication trade-offs for Local-SGD with large step size · NeurIPS 2019
Mathematical optimization › constrained optimization
fairness constraints
0.812024
Online Combinatorial Optimization with Group Fairness Constraints · IJCAI 2024
Approximation and online algorithms › online algorithms
online combinatorial optimization
0.812024
Online Combinatorial Optimization with Group Fairness Constraints · IJCAI 2024
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › online optimization
bandit convex optimization
0.712023
Federated Online and Bandit Convex Optimization · ICML 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory › online learning
online convex optimization
0.712023
Federated Online and Bandit Convex Optimization · ICML 2023
Mathematical optimization › stochastic optimization
communication-efficient distributed optimization
0.612022
Towards Optimal Communication Complexity in Distributed Non-Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2022
Mathematical optimization › distributed optimization
distributed nonconvex optimization
0.612022
Towards Optimal Communication Complexity in Distributed Non-Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2022
Mathematical optimization › stochastic optimization
variance reduction
0.612022
Towards Optimal Communication Complexity in Distributed Non-Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2022
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › distributed optimization
distributed convex optimization
0.512021
A Stochastic Newton Algorithm for Distributed Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2021
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
second-order optimization
0.512021
A Stochastic Newton Algorithm for Distributed Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2021
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
federated learning
0.422025
Revisiting Consensus Error: A Fine-grained Analysis of Local SGD under Second-order Data Heterogeneity · NeurIPS 2025
Minibatch vs Local SGD for Heterogeneous Distributed Learning · NeurIPS 2020
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning › distributed training
communication-efficient distributed SGD
0.412019
Communication trade-offs for Local-SGD with large step size · NeurIPS 2019
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › fairness
group fairness
0.212024
Online Combinatorial Optimization with Group Fairness Constraints · IJCAI 2024
Distributed systems
distributed optimization
0.212022
Towards Optimal Communication Complexity in Distributed Non-Convex Optimization · NeurIPS 2022

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

lower bound analysis · 1.9upper and lower bound analysis · 1.7linear regression · 1.7online optimization · 1.5variance reduction · 1.1data heterogeneity modeling · 0.8zeroth-order feedback · 0.7distributed regret analysis · 0.7stochastic gradient · 0.5quasi-self-concordant analysis · 0.5hessian-vector products · 0.5
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Revisiting Consensus Error: A Fine-grained Analysis of Local SGD under Second-order Data Heterogeneity
abstract
Local SGD, or Federated Averaging, is one of the most widely used algorithms for distributed optimization. Although it often outperforms alternatives such as mini-batch SGD, existing theory has not fully explained this advantage under realistic assumptions about data heterogeneity. Recent work has suggested that a second-order heterogeneity assumption may suffice to justify the empirical gains of local SGD. We confirm this conjecture by establishing new upper and lower bounds on the convergence of local SGD. These bounds demonstrate how a low second-order heterogeneity, combined with third-order smoothness, enables local SGD to interpolate between heterogeneous and homogeneous regimes while maintaining communication efficiency. Our main technical contribution is a refined analysis of the consensus error, a central quantity in such results. We validate our theory with experiments on a distributed linear regression task.
Kumar Kshitij Patel, Ali Zindari, Sebastian U. Stich
NeurIPS1
2024 The Limits and Potentials of Local SGD for Distributed Heterogeneous Learning with Intermittent Communication
abstract
Local SGD is a popular optimization method in distributed learning, often outperforming mini-batch SGD. Despite this practical success, proving the efficiency of local SGD has been difficult, creating a significant gap between theory and practice. We provide new lower bounds for local SGD under existing first-order data heterogeneity assumptions, showing these assumptions can not capture local SGD’s effectiveness. We also demonstrate the min-max optimality of accelerated mini-batch SGD under these assumptions. Our findings emphasize the need for improved modeling of data heterogeneity. Under higher-order assumptions, we provide new upper bounds that verify the dominance of local SGD over mini-batch SGD when data heterogeneity is low.
Kumar Kshitij Patel, Margalit Glasgow, Ali Zindari, Sebastian U. Stich, Nirmit Joshi, Nathan Srebro
COLT1
2024 Online Combinatorial Optimization with Group Fairness Constraints
Negin Golrezaei, Rad Niazadeh, Kumar Kshitij Patel, Fransisca Susan
IJCAI3
2023 Federated Online and Bandit Convex Optimization
abstract
We study the problems of *distributed online and bandit convex optimization* against an adaptive adversary. We aim to minimize the average regret on $M$ machines working in parallel over $T$ rounds with $R$ intermittent communications. Assuming the underlying cost functions are convex and can be generated adaptively, our results show that *collaboration is not beneficial when the machines have access to the first-order gradient information at the queried points*. This is in contrast to the case for stochastic functions, where each machine samples the cost functions from a fixed distribution. Furthermore, we delve into the more challenging setting of *federated online optimization with bandit (zeroth-order) feedback*, where the machines can only access values of the cost functions at the queried points. The key finding here is *identifying the high-dimensional regime where collaboration is beneficial and may even lead to a linear speedup in the number of machines*. We further illustrate our findings through federated adversarial linear bandits by developing novel distributed single and two-point feedback algorithms. Our work is the first attempt towards a systematic understanding of federated online optimization with limited feedback, and it attains tight regret bounds in the intermittent communication setting for both first and zeroth-order feedback. Our results thus bridge the gap between stochastic and adaptive settings in federated online optimization.
Kumar Kshitij Patel, Aadirupa Saha, Nathan Srebro
ICML1
2022 Towards Optimal Communication Complexity in Distributed Non-Convex Optimization
abstract
We study the problem of distributed stochastic non-convex optimization with intermittent communication. We consider the full participation setting where $M$ machines work in parallel over $R$ communication rounds and the partial participation setting where $M$ machines are sampled independently every round from some meta-distribution over machines. We propose and analyze a new algorithm that improves existing methods by requiring fewer and lighter variance reduction operations. We also present lower bounds, showing our algorithm is either $\textit{optimal}$ or $\textit{almost optimal}$ in most settings. Numerical experiments demonstrate the superior performance of our algorithm.
Kumar Kshitij Patel, Blake E. Woodworth, Brian Bullins, Nathan Srebro
NeurIPS1
2021 A Stochastic Newton Algorithm for Distributed Convex Optimization
abstract
We propose and analyze a stochastic Newton algorithm for homogeneous distributed stochastic convex optimization, where each machine can calculate stochastic gradients of the same population objective, as well as stochastic Hessian-vector products (products of an independent unbiased estimator of the Hessian of the population objective with arbitrary vectors), with many such stochastic computations performed between rounds of communication. We show that our method can reduce the number, and frequency, of required communication rounds, compared to existing methods without hurting performance, by proving convergence guarantees for quasi-self-concordant objectives (e.g., logistic regression), alongside empirical evidence.
Brian Bullins, Kumar Kshitij Patel, Ohad Shamir, Nathan Srebro, Blake E. Woodworth
NeurIPS2
2020 Don't Use Large Mini-batches, Use Local SGD
Tao Lin 0004, Sebastian U. Stich, Kumar Kshitij Patel, Martin Jaggi
ICLR3
2020 Is Local SGD Better than Minibatch SGD?
abstract
We study local SGD (also known as parallel SGD and federated SGD), a natural and frequently used distributed optimization method. Its theoretical foundations are currently lacking and we highlight how all existing error guarantees in the convex setting are dominated by a simple baseline, minibatch SGD. (1) For quadratic objectives we prove that local SGD strictly dominates minibatch SGD and that accelerated local SGD is minmax optimal for quadratics; (2) For general convex objectives we provide the first guarantee that at least \emph{sometimes} improves over minibatch SGD, but our guarantee does not always improve over, nor even match, minibatch SGD; (3) We show that indeed local SGD does \emph{not} dominate minibatch SGD by presenting a lower bound on the performance of local SGD that is worse than the minibatch SGD guarantee.
Blake E. Woodworth, Kumar Kshitij Patel, Sebastian U. Stich, Brian Bullins, H. Brendan McMahan, Ohad Shamir, Nathan Srebro
ICML2
2020 Minibatch vs Local SGD for Heterogeneous Distributed Learning
abstract
We analyze Local SGD (aka parallel or federated SGD) and Minibatch SGD in the heterogeneous distributed setting, where each machine has access to stochastic gradient estimates for a different, machine-specific, convex objective; the goal is to optimize w.r.t.~the average objective; and machines can only communicate intermittently. We argue that, (i) Minibatch SGD (even without acceleration) dominates all existing analysis of Local SGD in this setting, (ii) accelerated Minibatch SGD is optimal when the heterogeneity is high, and (iii) present the first upper bound for Local SGD that improves over Minibatch SGD in a non-homogeneous regime.
Blake E. Woodworth, Kumar Kshitij Patel, Nathan Srebro
NeurIPS2
2019 Communication trade-offs for Local-SGD with large step size
abstract
Synchronous mini-batch SGD is state-of-the-art for large-scale distributed machine learning. However, in practice, its convergence is bottlenecked by slow communication rounds between worker nodes. A natural solution to reduce communication is to use the \emph{``local-SGD''} model in which the workers train their model independently and synchronize every once in a while. This algorithm improves the computation-communication trade-off but its convergence is not understood very well. We propose a non-asymptotic error analysis, which enables comparison to \emph{one-shot averaging} i.e., a single communication round among independent workers, and \emph{mini-batch averaging} i.e., communicating at every step. We also provide adaptive lower bounds on the communication frequency for large step-sizes ($ t^{-\alpha} $, $ \alpha\in (1/2 , 1 ) $) and show that \emph{Local-SGD} reduces communication by a factor of $O\Big(\frac{\sqrt{T}}{P^{3/2}}\Big)$, with $T$ the total number of gradients and $P$ machines.
Aymeric Dieuleveut, Kumar Kshitij Patel
NeurIPS2
2019 Corruption-tolerant bandit learning
Sayash Kapoor, Kumar Kshitij Patel, Purushottam Kar
Mach. Learn.2