Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · November 3, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Distributed learning has drawn considerable attention due to its capability of learning from distributed data without aggregating raw observations. However, frequent exchange of model updates can become the main bottleneck of communication. Therefore, one-shot approaches where each worker fits a local model and sends it to the server to aggregate emerge. It is known that averaging can achieve the so-called pooled-data mean squared error (MSE) order of a hypothetical node that has access to data from the server and all the workers, and performs empirical risk minimization (ERM) on it. However, when the number of workers increases too fast compared to the local sample size, nonzero local estimation bias prevents averaging from achieving this order. In this paper, we study whether independent server data can overcome this limitation. We consider $m$ workers with $n$ observations each and a server with $p$ observations, all i.i.d., giving $N=mn+p$ observations in total. Under certain regularity conditions, a pooled-data ERM achieves MSE of order $\mathcal O(N^{-1})$. We analyze deterministic nonnegative averaging of convex-loss M-estimators, with equal worker weights and the server's own estimator included. Under our assumptions, including nonzero local bias of order $n^{-α}$, $α\geq1$, sample-size weighted averaging achieves the pooled-data MSE order whenever $m=\mathcal O(n^{2α-1})$. Above this worker scale, it does so if and only if $p=Ω(nm\cdot m/n^{2α-1})$. Hence, server-only estimation, whose MSE is of order $\mathcal{O}(p^{-1})$, can achieve pooled-data order while sample-size weighting fails. Analytical examples and synthetic experiments illustrate when averaging matches the pooled-data MSE order, complemented by CIFAR-10 experiments comparing aggregation strategies with linear and nonlinear classifiers.