Papers › Does Learning from Decentralized Non-IID Unlabeled Data Benefit from Self Supervision?
Does Learning from Decentralized Non-IID Unlabeled Data Benefit from Self Supervision?
Lirui Wang, Kaiqing Zhang, Yunzhu Li, Yonglong Tian, Russ Tedrake
Decentralized learning has been advocated and widely deployed to make efficient use of distributed datasets, with an extensive focus on supervised learning (SL) problems. Unfortunately, the majority of real-world data are unlabeled and can be highly heterogeneous across sources. In this work, we carefully study decentralized learning with unlabeled data through the lens of self-supervised learning (SSL), specifically contrastive visual representation learning. We study the effectiveness of a range of contrastive learning algorithms under decentralized learning settings, on relatively large-scale datasets including ImageNet-100, MS-COCO, and a new real-world robotic warehouse dataset. Our experiments show that the decentralized SSL (Dec-SSL) approach is robust to the heterogeneity of decentralized datasets, and learns useful representation for object classification, detection, and segmentation tasks. This robustness makes it possible to significantly reduce communication and reduce the participation ratio of data sources with only minimal drops in performance. Interestingly, using the same amount of data, the representation learned by Dec-SSL can not only perform on par with that learned by centralized SSL which requires communication and excessive data storage costs, but also sometimes outperform representations extracted from decentralized SL which requires extra knowledge about the data labels. Finally, we provide theoretical insights into understanding why data heterogeneity is less of a concern for Dec-SSL objectives, and introduce feature alignment and clustering techniques to develop a new Dec-SSL algorithm that further improves the performance, in the face of highly non-IID data. Our study presents positive evidence to embrace unlabeled data in decentralized learning, and we hope to provide new insights into whether and why decentralized SSL is effective.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2210.10947")
Code
Syntology Ran 2 of 2 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · honoured contract; 1 ran · our draft was wrong.
By repository: official repository: 2 samples from 1 repository, 2 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
2 samples harvested; 2 ran; 1 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 2 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from liruiw/dec-ssl. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
cc4c605a1dd69746 · report
0dee20694ea4b3ee · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections