When NOMA Meets AIGC: Enhanced Wireless Federated Learning

In the context of WFL networks, many works such as [7, 8, 9, 10, 11] have studied various important problems regarding the implementation of WFL. Specifically, in [7], an algorithm for jointly optimizing the learning, radio resource allocation and device selection based on the Hungarian method was proposed to minimize the WFL loss function. In [8], the problem of joint learning and communication resource optimization to minimize the total energy consumption was investigated, and an iterative algorithm was proposed to achieve a local optimal solution. In [9], the computation and the communication resources as well as the number of the local model parameter quantization bits were jointly optimized to minimize the WFL convergence time. In [10], an iterative algorithm for jointly scheduling devices, local iterations and radio resources was developed based on the pointer network embedded deep reinforcement learning method and the breadth-first search method. In [11], an incentive mechanism based on the Stackelberg game was designed to motivate the devices to participate in collaborative model training.

In the above works, [7, 8, 10, 11] adopted the frequency division multiple access (FDMA) wireless transmission scheme, and [9] adopted the time division multiple access (TDMA) wireless transmission scheme. Both FDMA and TDMA belong to orthogonal multiple access (OMA) transmission scheme. However, OMA suffers from low transmission efficiency [12, 13]. To fully realize the potential capability of WFL, more efficient transmission schemes other than OMA are needed. In this context, non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) [13, 14], which supports multiple concurrent transmissions on the same spectrum band, is a promising technique to realize high transmission efficiency in WFL networks. Particularly, devices can upload their local models simultaneously using the superposition coding, and the WFL server can decode different device signals by using the successive interference cancellation (SIC) technique.

There have been some works on NOMA-enhanced WFL networks. Specifically, in [15], devices were assumed to be wirelessly powered by the base station (BS), and the problem of joint optimization of the NOMA communication and computation resources to minimize the system-wise cost was investigated. A layered algorithm based on the monotonic optimization was developed to solve the joint optimization problem. In [16], the problem of jointly optimizing device scheduling, transmit power and computation frequency allocation in a relay-assisted NOMA-enhanced WFL network to minimize the energy consumption was solved by graph theory. In [17], devices were grouped into different NOMA groups for local model uploading, and the transmit power and bandwidth of NOMA groups were jointly optimized to maximize the system convergence metric based on convex optimization. In [18], the joint optimization of device selection and resource allocation to minimize the total training latency in a NOMA-enhanced WFL network was carried by the monotonicity analysis and dual decomposition method.

Meanwhile, AIGC in wireless networks has attracted a lot of attention recently, such as the AIGC-enhanced semantic communications [19, 20, 21], blockchain-enabled AIGC [22], distributed AIGC [23], and AIGC service provider selection [24]. AIGC has also been integrated with WFL in recent works [25, 26]. Particularly, the work in [25] applied WFL to achieve efficient AIGC, and presented WFL-based techniques for AIGC to generate diverse and personalized contents. While [25] focused on how WFL can empower the AIGC, the work in [26] adopted AIGC to empower WFL. Specifically, in [26], AIGC was proposed to generate more training data for devices to minimize the device energy consumption under the learning performance constraint.

Since devices are heterogeneous and the data are limited and unevenly distributed, AIGC can be used to generate the specified data missing at the devices for more efficient local training and improved global convergence performance in WFL. In this regard, the pioneer work [26] has considered to use AIGC to enhance the WFL performance. However, the work [26] ignored the procedure of synthetic data downloading from the AIGC server to the devices, the time of which cannot be neglected in practice. In addition, the work [26] used a low-efficient FDMA transmission scheme for local model uploading, which is inadequate for a large amount of devices. The above research gaps motivate the work in this paper to use the highly efficient NOMA transmission scheme both for synthetic data downloading and local model uploading in AIGC-enhanced WFL networks, and jointly design the synthetic data distribution, two-way communication resource and computation resource allocation to maximize the learning performance. Note that jointly designing resource optimization policy in NOMA+AIGC-enhanced WFL networks is non-trivial, since the optimization variables are highly coupled in such complicated non-convex optimization problems, while the SIC decoding policy in NOMA can further complicate the optimization.

The main contributions of this paper are summarized as follows:

(1) We are the first to propose a NOMA+AIGC-enhanced WFL system model, where devices can download synthetic data from the AIGC server based on NOMA, then train the local models based on the local data and synthetic data, and upload the local models to the WFL server based on NOMA for global model aggregation. The problem of jointly optimizing the synthetic data allocation, the time allocation, the transmit power allocation of the BS and the devices, the SIC decoding order, and the computing frequency allocation, is formulated with the objective of minimizing the global learning error, under various system constraints.

(2) We propose an efficient low-complexity algorithm with partial closed-form results to achieve a local optimal solution to the problem. First, we analytically derive the closed-form optimal computing frequency allocation to simplify the problem. Then, the block coordinate descent (BCD) method is adopted to decouple the complex problem into two simpler subproblems. The first subproblem optimizes the synthetic data allocation and the time allocation, where the optimal time allocation is analytical obtained in closed form, and the optimal synthetic data allocation is obtained via convex optimization. The second subproblem optimizes the transmit power allocation of the BS, the transmit power of the devices, and the SIC decoding order, where the optimal transmit power allocation of the BS and the transmit power of the devices are analytically obtained in a recursive form, and the optimal SIC decoding order is analytically obtained in closed form.

(3) Extensive simulation results are illustrated to demonstrate the superiority of the proposed NOMA+AIGC-enhanced scheme. The results show the advantages of combining NOMA and AIGC with WFL. It is shown that the proposed scheme outperforms the existing and benchmark schemes such as the FDMA or TDMA+AIGC-enhanced schemes, in terms of global learning accuracy, under various system configurations. Particularly, the learning performance improvement of our proposed scheme is more obvious when the data synthesizing capability of the AIGC server is stronger, the maximum latency requirement is more stringent, and the number of devices is larger.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section II presents the system model of the proposed NOMA+AIGC-enhanced WFL network. Section III formulates the optimization problem of maximizing the learning performance and presents an algorithm framework to solve the optimization problem. Section IV and V presents algorithms to optimally solve the two subproblems. Section VI provides simulation examples to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed NOMA+AIGC-enhanced scheme. Finally, the paper is concluded in Section VII.

The whole AIGC-enhanced WFL procedure consists of three phases [26]. In the first phase, all the devices send the data synthesis request to the AIGC server indicating the specific data distributions/properties, and then the AIGC server synthesizes the data required by all the devices. Due to data scarcity/heterogeneity, the local data available at the devices may lack particular types of data, which may hinder the convergence of the global model. Thus, the synthetic data can compensate for the missing portions of local data to improve the learning convergence [26]. We assume that due to physical limitations, the AIGC server can generate a maximum amount of $D^{\mathrm{gen}}$ synthetic data [6]. Since the synthetic data received by all the devices cannot exceed the maximum amount to bear by the AIGC server, we have the following synthetic data constraint as given by

In the second phase, the synthetic data are transmitted from the AIGC server in the cloud to the BS and then the devices with time $T^{\mathrm{down}}$. Since the AIGC server connects with the BS via high-speed wired backhaul, the time for transmission the synthetic data from the AIGC server to the BS is ignored. In the third phase, the WFL server first broadcasts the initial global model to the devices, then each device trains the local model using the local dataset and the synthetic dataset, and finally uploads the trained local model to the WFL server for global model aggregation and update. We assume that the number of global model iterations is fixed at $N.$ Let $D^{\mathrm{mod}},$ $T^{\mathrm{syn}},$ $T^{\mathrm{br}},$ $T^{\mathrm{loc}}$ and $T^{\mathrm{up}}$ denote the local/global model data size in bits, the time required for generating the synthetic data for all the devices, the time for the global model broadcasting of the WFL server, the time for the local model training of all the devices, and the time for the local model uploading of all the devices, respectively. Then, the time of the third phase is $N\left(T^{\mathrm{br}}+T^{\mathrm{loc}}+T^{\mathrm{up}}\right).$ We assume that there is a pre-determined maximum latency $T^{\mathrm{max}}$ for the whole WFL procedure, i.e.,

Since the synthetic data are generated by the pre-trained AI generative model in the AIGC server, we assume that $T^{\mathrm{syn}}$ is modeled as a linear function of the amount of synthetic data generated for all the devices [6], i.e., $T^{\mathrm{syn}}=\varrho\sum_{k=1}^{K}D_{k}^{\mathrm{gen}}$.

According to the results in [26], the global learning error (i.e., the global learning model accuracy) of the WFL depends on the local training dataset sizes of the devices and the number of global iterations, and can be modeled as

where $\mathbf{D}^{\mathrm{gen}}=\{D_{k}^{\mathrm{gen}},k=1,\ldots,K\},$ $\zeta$ is a positive constant parameter, and $\alpha,$ $\beta,$ $\gamma$ are positive hyper-parameters that can be obtained through curve fitting [26].

Let $f_{k},$ $w$ and $\tau$ denote the computing frequency of the device $k,$ the number of CPU cycles of the devices to locally train one data sample, and the local epoch, respectively. The computing frequency of each device is capped by its maximum value, i.e.,

where $f_{k}^{\mathrm{max}}$ is the maximum computing frequency of the device $k.$ Then, the time of the device $k$ for a single-round local model training is given by

Since each device has to finish the local model training within the required time $T^{\mathrm{loc}},$ we have

In addition, the energy consumption per single-round local model training of the device $k$ is written as

where $\varpi_{k}$ denote the hardware energy coefficient [27].

Let $h_{k}$ and $g_{k}$ denote the channel gains from the BS to the device $k,$ and from the device $k$ to the BS, respectively. The system bandwidth is $B.$ There are three procedures that involve wireless transmissions, i.e., synthetic data downloading from the BS to the devices, global model broadcasting from the BS to the devices, and local model uploading from the devices to the BS.

For synthetic data downloading, downlink NOMA is applied. Specifically, according to the downlink NOMA principle, the messages intended for the devices are transmitted simultaneously based on the superposition coding. Each device can apply SIC to cancel the messages of other devices whose channel gains are smaller than its own channel gain. Without loss of the generality, we assume the devices are sorted in the ascending order of the channel gain $h_{k},$ i.e., $h_{1}<h_{2}<\ldots<h_{K}$. Let $p_{k}$ denote the transmit power of the message for the device $k$. Thus, the achievable rate for synthetic data downloading of the device $k$ is given by

where $\sigma^{2}$ is the noise power spectral density. Since the allocated synthetic data has to be finished transmitting within the time $T^{\mathrm{down}},$ we have

where $\Gamma$ is the size of one data sample in bits. Furthermore, the maximum transmit power of the BS is limited as

where $P$ is the maximum transmit power of the BS.

For global model broadcasting, the BS is assumed to transmit at its maximum power $P,$ and in order for all the devices to successfully receive the global model, the broadcasting rate is chosen as the minimum rate achievable for all the devices, i.e., $B\log_{2}\left(1+\frac{h_{1}P}{\sigma^{2}B}\right).$ Since the global model data has to be transmitted within the time $T^{\mathrm{br}},$ we have

For local model uploading, uplink NOMA is adopted. Specifically, the messages of all devices are transmitted to the BS simultaneously. Let $q_{k}$ denote the transmit power of the device $k,$ and $Q_{k}$ denote the maximum transmit power of the device $k.$ Then, we have

At the BS, the SIC is adopted to decode the messages of all the devices. Denote by $\pi_{k}$ the SIC decoding order of the device $k$. Let $\boldsymbol{\pi}=\{\pi_{k},\forall k\},$ and it belongs to the set $\Pi$ of all possible SIC decoding orders of all $K$ messages. Thus, the achievable rate of the device $k$ for local model uploading is expressed as

In order to upload the local model to the BS within the time $T^{\mathrm{up}},$ we have

In addition, the energy consumption of the device $k$ for local model uploading per single-round training is given by

Based on the system description in the previous section, the energy consumption of the device $k$ for a single-round training is written as

We assume that there is an energy budget for each device, i.e.,

where $E_{k}^{\mathrm{max}}$ is the maximum energy consumption of the device $k$ per single-round training.

Our focus is maximizing the learning performance under the constraints analyzed in the system description. Specifically, the optimization objective is minimizing the global learning error (i.e., to maximize the global learning model accuracy), and the optimization variables are the synthetic data allocation $\mathbf{D}^{\mathrm{gen}},$ the time allocation $\mathbf{T}=\{T^{\mathrm{down}},T^{\mathrm{br}},T^{\mathrm{loc}},T^{\mathrm{up}}\},$ the transmit power allocation of the BS $\mathbf{p}=\{p_{k},k=1,\ldots,K\},$ the transmit power of the devices $\mathbf{q}=\{q_{k},k=1,\ldots,K\},$ the SIC decoding order $\boldsymbol{\pi},$ and the computing frequency allocation $\mathbf{f}=\{f_{k},k=1,\ldots,K\}$. Mathematically, the optimization problem for the NOMA+AIGC-enhanced WFL is formulated as

where the abbreviation ‘$\mathrm{s.t.}$’ stands for ‘subject to’ and the abbreviation ‘$\mathrm{o.v.}$’ stands for ‘optimization variables’. The constraint (18b) restricts that the total transmitted synthetic data is smaller than the totally synthetic data that can be generated in the AIGC server. The constraint (18c) requires that the total time for $N$ WFL rounds is less than the pre-defined maximum latency. The constraint (18d) restricts the maximum computing frequency of each device. The constraint (18e) requires that each device finishes the local model training within the required time. The constraint (18f) requires that the synthetic data can finish transmitting within the synthetic data transmission time. The constraint (18g) restricts the transmit power of the BS. The constraint (18h) requires that the global model data can finish transmitting within the global model broadcasting time. The constraint (18i) restricts the transmit power of each device. The constraint (18j) requires that the local model data can finish transmitting within the local model uploading time. The constraint (18k) restricts the energy consumption of each device. The constraint (18l) restricts the SIC decoding order. The constraints (18m)-(18q) restrict that the optimization variables are non-negative.

Since $\boldsymbol{\pi}$ is discrete and the constraints (18f), (18j), (18k) are non-convex, the problem (18) is a mixed integer nonlinear programming (MINLP) problem, which is NP-hard in general, and its optimal solution is thus generally intractable to find. Before proposing an algorithm to solve the problem (18), we present analysis to equivalently simplify the problem (18).

Lemma 1 indicates that each device shall use up the allocated local model training time for saving energy consumption. From Lemma 1, the optimal $\mathbf{f}$ is derived as

By inserting (19) into the constraints (18d) and (18k), we have

In addition, from (3), it can be shown that the objective function $\triangle(\mathbf{D}^{\mathrm{gen}})$ is a monotonically increasing function of $\sum_{k=1}^{K}\left(D_{k}^{\mathrm{loc}}+D_{k}^{\mathrm{gen}}\right)^{-\beta}$. Thus, minimizing $\triangle(\mathbf{D}^{\mathrm{gen}})$ is equivalent to minimizing $\sum_{k=1}^{K}\left(D_{k}^{\mathrm{loc}}+D_{k}^{\mathrm{gen}}\right)^{-\beta}$.

Thanks to Lemma 1, the number of optimization variables is reduced. After the above equivalent problem transformation, the problem (18) is rewritten as

The problem (22) is still a MINLP problem, and its optimal solution is hard to obtain. Therefore, we develop an efficient low-complexity algorithm based on the BCD method to achieve a local optimal solution. The overall flowchart of solving the problem (18) is shown in Fig. 2. Specifically, the problem (22) is decoupled into two subproblems. One subproblem on the left-hand-side optimizes $\mathbf{D}^{\mathrm{gen}},\mathbf{T}$ with given $\mathbf{p},\mathbf{q},\boldsymbol{\pi}$ as shown in the left part of Fig. 2, and the other one on the right-hand-side optimizes $\mathbf{p},\mathbf{q},\boldsymbol{\pi}$ with given $\mathbf{D}^{\mathrm{gen}},\mathbf{T}$ as shown in the right part of Fig. 2. The two subproblems are solved iteratively until the objective function value in (22a) converges. We will optimally solve the two subproblems in the next two sections.

By introducing an auxiliary variable $\eta=\min_{k}\frac{R_{k}^{\mathrm{down}}}{D_{k}^{\mathrm{gen}}}$, the problem (33) can be reformulated as

It is noted that the constraint (18f) is inactive as long as the problem is feasible, i.e., $\eta\geq\frac{\Gamma}{T^{\mathrm{down}}}.$ Next, we present an important property of the optimal solution to the problem (35).

From Lemma 6, the optimal $\mathbf{p}$ given $\eta$ satisfies the following equalities

After obtaining the optimal $\mathbf{p}$, what remains is optimizing $\eta$ in the problem (35). From (37), it shows that $p_{k}$ is an increasing function of $\eta.$ Therefore, if $\eta$ is larger than the optimal $\eta,$ the constraint (18g) will be violated. Accordingly, the optimal $\eta$ for the problem (35) can be derived by a bisection search of $\eta$, where $\eta$ is increased if the constraint (18g) with given $\eta$ is obeyed, and is decreased if the constraint (18g) with given $\eta$ is violated.

The proposed algorithm to optimize $\mathbf{p}$ is summarized in Algorithm 2. Since the bisection search method converges in finite number of iterations which is independent of the number of devices [30], the complexity of Algorithm 2 is merely linear in the number of devices, i.e., $\mathcal{O}(K).$