Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generated
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

One-round progress of strongly convex FedAvg

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let N,d,K≥1 be positive integers and 1≤S≤N. Let fi:Rd→R be differentiable, μ-strongly convex and β-smooth, with 0<μ≤β, and put f=N−1∑i=1Nfi. Suppose f attains its minimum at x⋆ with value f⋆. At a round-start server point x, run the uniform-client analysis mode of FedAvg with S clients sampled uniformly without replacement, K local steps, local step ηl>0, and global scale ηg≥S. The client sample is independent of the fresh local-oracle randomness. Assume conditionally unbiased local stochastic gradients with within-client conditional variance at most σ2. These moment conditions are conditional on the full prequery history: the round-start history, the client sample, and all earlier revealed oracle draws from every client in a fixed chronological ordering of the queries. Suppose B≥1, G≥0, and 1N∑i∥∇fi(z)∥22≤G2+2βB2(f(z)−f⋆)(z∈Rd). Alternatively, assume the standard (G,B)-bounded gradient-dissimilarity condition 1N∑i∥∇fi(z)∥22≤G2+B2∥∇f(z)∥22(z∈Rd). Either assumption gives all the conclusions below with the same G,B and stepsize restrictions. Let η~=Kηlηg. For each client i, define a hypothetical local path yi,0=x,yi,1,…,yi,K by the same local update rule with fresh oracle draws independent of the client sample. For selected clients this path is the actual local execution; for unselected clients it is a counterfactual copy used only in the expectation below. Independence among different clients' oracle draws is not required, but the stated full-history conditional moment conditions must hold for the counterfactual queries too. Define E=1KN∑i=1N∑k=1KE∥yi,k−1−x∥22. If 0<η~≤[32(B2+1)β]−1, then the next server iterate x+ satisfies E∥x+−x⋆∥22≤(1−μη~/2)∥x−x⋆∥22−η~(f(x)−f⋆)+5η~2σ2KS+8(1−SN)η~2G2S+3βη~E. Expectation is conditional on the round-start history and averages the client sample and local stochastic-gradient draws.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The local-client functions, round start, FedAvg updates and sampling law in the Statement.

[F1]

Federated averaging (FedAvg): in uniform-client analysis mode, x+=x−η~(KS)−1∑i∈S,kgi(yi,k−1).

[F2]

Federated objectives and client sampling: f=N−1∑ifi and S is a uniform size-S subset.

[F3]

Moments of a uniformly sampled fixed-size client set: for fixed client vectors, the sample mean has their population mean and its centered second moment is at most 2(1−S/N)S−1 times the population second moment.

[F4]

Relaxed inequalities for squared Euclidean norms: squared norms of a sum are bounded by the corresponding two-term relaxed-square inequality.

[F5]

Strong-convexity inequality for a perturbed gradient point: for each fi, its gradient at a local point paired with x−x⋆ is bounded below by the function gap, strong-convexity distance term, and local displacement term stated there.

[F6]

Smooth convex gradient differences around a minimizer and Gradient of a finite sum is the finite sum of gradients: at x⋆ the average gradient vanishes, and the population second moment of the centered client gradients is at most 2β(f(x)−f⋆).

[F7]

The Euclidean inner product ⟨x,y⟩=∑k<nxkyk on Rn: inner products and squared norms obey the Euclidean expansion identities.

[F9]

Second moment bound for a finite martingale-difference sum: a finite sum of conditionally centered local-gradient errors has second moment at most twice the sum of its conditional variance bounds.

[F10]

Standard client dissimilarity implies the gap form with unchanged parameters: under the stated common smoothness and attained finite minimum, the standard condition implies the displayed gap form with unchanged G,B.

[A1]

The conditional means, variance bounds, and fresh-draw assumptions in the Statement hold at every local query.

[A2]

Assume the Axiom of Choice. It is used only to invoke the published conditional-expectation-as-an-a.e.-class interface in [F8].

Proof

1.1F10F1F2F5F8A1A2givenalgebra

In the standard-condition branch, [F10] supplies the displayed gap-form assumption with unchanged G,B; in the original gap-form branch it is already assumed. Put Δ=x+−x. Conditional on the round-start history, unbiasedness [given] and uniform client sampling give E[Δ∣F]=−η~KN∑i,kE[∇fi(yi,k−1)∣F]. Expand ∥x+Δ−x⋆∥22 and use this conditional mean in its cross term. Apply [F5] at each local point yi,k−1 with comparison points x⋆ and x. After averaging over i,k, this gives E∥x+Δ−x⋆∥22≤∥x−x⋆∥22−2η~(f(x)−f⋆)−μη~2∥x−x⋆∥22+2βη~E+E∥Δ∥22.

1.2F1F3F4F6F7F8F9A1A2givenalgebra

Write vS=S−1∑i∈S∇fi(x) and [given] dS=(KS)−1∑i∈S,k(∇fi(yi,k−1)−∇fi(x)). Jensen and β-Lipschitzness give E∥dS∥22≤β2E. For the sampled mean at x, [F3] and the dissimilarity bound give E∥1S∑i∈S∇fi(x)∥22≤2β(f(x)−f⋆)+2(1−SN)G2+2βB2(f(x)−f⋆)S. Reveal the client sample first and order its KS local oracle draws chronologically. By [A1], each centered error has conditional mean zero and second moment at most σ2 given the entire preceding history, so [F9] applies to this filtration. After division by KS, their sum has second moment at most 2σ2/(KS). Apply [F4] first to vS+dS, then to that sum plus the noise. The resulting second-moment bound is E∥Δ∥22≤16β(B2+1)η~2(f(x)−f⋆)+4β2η~2E+8(1−SN)η~2G2S+4η~2σ2KS.

2.1F1F2step 1.1step 1.2givenalgebra∎

Substitute step 1.2 into step 1.1. Because 16β(B2+1)η~≤1/2, the combined objective-gap coefficient is at most −3η~/2≤−η~. Also βη~≤1/64, since B≥1, so the local-drift coefficient satisfies 2βη~+4β2η~2≤3βη~. Increase the noise coefficient from 4 to 5 and retain the sampling term. These substitutions give precisely the Statement without using any local-drift estimate.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

61 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources