惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

月光博客
月光博客
人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
罗磊的独立博客
博客园_首页
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
博客园 - 司徒正美
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
Jina AI
Jina AI
美团技术团队
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
小众软件
小众软件
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
爱范儿
爱范儿
博客园 - Franky
量子位
V
V2EX
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
雷峰网
雷峰网

cs.DC updates on arXiv.org

DUAL-BLADE: Dual-Path NVMe-Direct KV-Cache Offloading for Edge LLM Inference Progressive Semantic Communication for Efficient Edge-Cloud Vision-Language Models Efficient, VRAM-Constrained xLM Inference on Clients Folding Tensor and Sequence Parallelism for Memory-Efficient Transformer Training & Inference DORA: A Scalable Asynchronous Reinforcement Learning System for Language Model Training AMMA: A Multi-Chiplet Memory-Centric Architecture for Low-Latency 1M Context Attention Serving RaMP: Runtime-Aware Megakernel Polymorphism for Mixture-of-Experts Spark Policy Toolkit: Semantic Contracts and Scalable Execution for Policy Learning in Spark Internet of Everything in the 6G Era: Paradigms, Enablers, Potentials and Future Directions PolyKV: A Shared Asymmetrically-Compressed KV Cache Pool for Multi-Agent LLM Inference A Survey on Split Learning for LLM Fine-Tuning: Models, Systems, and Privacy Optimizations ITAS: A Multi-Agent Architecture for LLM-Based Intelligent Tutoring Latency and Cost of Multi-Agent Intelligent Tutoring at Scale TACO: Efficient Communication Compression of Intermediate Tensors for Scalable Tensor-Parallel LLM Training FreeScale: Distributed Training for Sequence Recommendation Models with Minimal Scaling Cost CommFuse: Hiding Tail Latency via Communication Decomposition and Fusion for Distributed LLM Training A Taxonomy and Resolution Strategy for Client-Level Disagreements in Federated Learning Usable Agent Discovery for Decentralized AI Systems Cloud to Edge: Benchmarking LLM Inference On Hardware-Accelerated Single-Board Computers Data-Free Contribution Estimation in Federated Learning using Gradient von Neumann Entropy Shard the Gradient, Scale the Model: Serverless Federated Aggregation via Gradient Partitioning Promoting Simple Agents: Ensemble Methods for Event-Log Prediction GraphLeap: Decoupling Graph Construction and Convolution for Vision GNN Acceleration on FPGA AGNT2: Autonomous Agent Economies on Interaction-Optimized Layer 2 Infrastructure FedSIR: Spectral Client Identification and Relabeling for Federated Learning with Noisy Labels Stream-CQSA: Avoiding Out-of-Memory in Attention Computation via Flexible Workload Scheduling A Delta-Aware Orchestration Framework for Scalable Multi-Agent Edge Computing Federated Learning over Blockchain-Enabled Cloud Infrastructure Optimal Routing for Federated Learning over Dynamic Satellite Networks: Tractable or Not? Sherpa.ai Privacy-Preserving Multi-Party Entity Alignment without Intersection Disclosure for Noisy Identifiers
Performing work efficiently in the presence of faults
Cynthia Dwork, Joseph Y. Halpern, O. Waarts · 2000-06-03 · via cs.DC updates on arXiv.org

We consider a system of t synchronous processes that communicate only by sending messages to one another, and that together must perform $n$ independent units of work. Processes may fail by crashing; we want to guarantee that in every execution of the protocol in which at least one process survives, all n units of work will be performed. We consider three parameters: the number of messages sent, the total number of units of work performed (including multiplicities), and time. We present three protocols for solving the problem. All three are work-optimal, doing O(n+t) work. The first has moderate costs in the remaining two parameters, sending O(t\sqrt{t}) messages, and taking O(n+t) time. This protocol can be easily modified to run in any completely asynchronous system equipped with a failure detection mechanism. The second sends only O(t log{t}) messages, but its running time is large (exponential in n and t). The third is essentially time-optimal in the (usual) case in which there are no failures, and its time complexity degrades gracefully as the number of failures increases.