Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2304.13738

Scalable, Distributed AI Frameworks: Leveraging Cloud Computing for Enhanced Deep Learning Performance and Efficiency

Neelesh Mungoli
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In recent years, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and cloud computing has emerged as a promising avenue for addressing the growing computational demands of AI applications. This paper presents a comprehensive study of scalable, distributed AI frameworks leveraging cloud computing for enhanced deep learning performance and efficiency. We first provide an overview of popular AI frameworks and cloud services, highlighting their respective strengths and weaknesses. Next, we delve into the critical aspects of data storage and management in cloud-based AI systems, discussing data preprocessing, feature engineering, privacy, and security. We then explore parallel and distributed training techniques for AI models, focusing on model partitioning, communication strategies, and cloud-based training architectures. In subsequent chapters, we discuss optimization strategies for AI workloads in the cloud, covering load balancing, resource allocation, auto-scaling, and performance benchmarking. We also examine AI model deployment and serving in the cloud, outlining containerization, serverless deployment options, and monitoring best practices. To ensure the cost-effectiveness of cloud-based AI solutions, we present a thorough analysis of costs, optimization strategies, and case studies showcasing successful deployments. Finally, we summarize the key findings of this study, discuss the challenges and limitations of cloud-based AI, and identify emerging trends and future research opportunities in the field.

Explore related subjects

cs.LGcs.AIcs.NI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Neelesh Mungoli. 2023-04-26. Scalable, Distributed AI Frameworks: Leveraging Cloud Computing for Enhanced Deep Learning Performance and Efficiency. https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.13738

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG↗