Bureaucrats, dave_user, Administrators
4,650
edits
Changes
→Execution time
== Execution time ==
As part of the comparison between NVFlare and Flower, a method of evaluation involved the analysis of execution time across 4-core and 1-core settings. This approach aimed to assess both the degree of parallelism and the overall speed of the frameworks in completing assigned tasks. The entire analysis was conducted using the DAVE Embedded Systems SBC ORCA embedded device presented earlier, reflecting scenarios in industrial or corporate contexts where not all cores might be available within an FL architecture due to other ongoing tasks. In such cases, there might be only one core available for utilization. The reduction of cores from 4 to 1 was done by means of a kernel-level setting of the cores via the command line parameter <code>maxcpus=1</code>. The setup used for this test was the following:
{| class="wikitable"
! extbf{Framework}
! \textbf{client}
! \textbf{round}
! \textbf{epoch}
! \textbf{step}
! \textbf{model}
! \textbf{device}
|-
| Flower
| 2
| 1
| 1
| 1250
| SimpleCNN
| SBC ORCA
|-
| NVFlare
| 2
| 1
| 1
| 1250
| SimpleCNN
| SBC ORCA
|}
In order to have two clients, also the Xilinx Zynq UltraScale+ MPSoC ZCU104 Evaluation Kit was used. Since the two boards have similar CPUs the execution time for the two embedded devices is the same, allowing only the DAVE Embedded Systems SBC ORCA device to be considered for calculating the execution time as the number of available cores varies. The model architecture used is the SimpleCNN already pre
sented in section 4.1.5.
The running time analysed was divided into two parts: the training time
and the total time. In order to get a more detailed view of the various
execution times for the two frameworks and configurations used, this is sum-
marised in Figure 4.30 and Figure 4.31:
= Applying NVFlare to a real-word case =
