让下一篇重要论文，不再错过。

原文摘要

Selecting a Federated Learning (FL) framework requires understanding the resource demands of its training and evaluation workflow. This work compares Flower, NVIDIA FLARE, and FedBioMed using two-dimensional MedNIST classification with ResNet-10 in a containerized, single-host environment. Following a dated review of repository activity and documented medical applications, we evaluated nine configurations per framework, with three random seeds, for a total of 81 executions. The configurations varied federation size, communication rounds, and batch size. We monitored execution time, CPU and RAM consumption, host-level GPU utilization, server network traffic rates, and model accuracy at the end of each execution. The implementations shared nominal learning settings while retaining differences in data splitting and federated evaluation. Configuration-blocked non-parametric analysis identified differences in execution time, client and server memory, GPU utilization, and network traffic rates. NVIDIA FLARE exhibited the lowest server-memory consumption and the highest host-level GPU utilization, Flower exhibited the highest average server network traffic rate, and FedBioMed required more client memory and longer execution time. No statistically significant difference in final accuracy was detected within the evaluated short training schedules; this does not establish convergence or equivalent predictive performance. The results characterize the configured workflows under shared hardware resources. They provide a concrete case study of system behavior, with conclusions bounded by workflow asymmetries, local networking, and the lightweight MedNIST workload.