Optical Network Resource Management for Large-Scale AI Training Clusters
Keywords:
optical networks; AI training clusters; resource management; data center interconnects; scheduling; sustainability; governance; robustness; fairness; policyAbstract
Large-scale artificial intelligence training clusters increasingly depend on optical networking to sustain the bandwidth, latency, and synchronization requirements of distributed model training. This paper examines optical network resource management as a socio-technical problem that spans physical-layer transmission, switching architectures, scheduler design, operational governance, energy sustainability, robustness, and fairness. The analysis begins by characterizing training workloads, including collective communication, parameter synchronization, pipeline and tensor parallelism, and the sensitivity of convergence to tail latency. It then evaluates optical resource management architectures, including hybrid electrical-optical fabrics, optical circuit switching, wavelength switching, and software-defined control planes, with attention to structural trade-offs among reconfiguration latency, port count, buffering, circuit utilization, and failure isolation. The paper argues that resource management for AI clusters cannot be reduced to bandwidth provisioning because optical reconfiguration interacts with job placement, checkpointing, collective algorithms, and failure recovery. Governance mechanisms must therefore coordinate admission control, topology-aware scheduling, tenant fairness, observability, and environmental accounting. The discussion also considers deployment constraints in multi-tenant and geo-distributed environments, the risks of overfitting infrastructure to a narrow class of model architectures, and the policy implications of concentrating advanced optical capacity in a small number of institutions. The conclusion proposes a research agenda around adaptive control, disaggregated optical fabrics, energy-aware scheduling, robust circuit restoration, and transparent reporting of infrastructure performance and sustainability.
References
1. Dean, J., & Barroso, L. A. (2013). The tail at scale. Communications of the ACM, 56(2), 74–80. https://doi.org/10.1145/2408776.2408794
2. Narayanan, D., Harlap, A., Phanishayee, A., Seshadri, V., Devanur, N. R., Ganger, G. R., Gibbons, P. B., & Zaharia, M. (2019). PipeDream: Generalized pipeline parallelism for DNN training. Proceedings of the 27th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341301.3359646
3. Shoeybi, M., Patwary, M., Puri, R., LeGresley, P., Casper, J., & Catanzaro, B. (2019). Megatron-LM: Training multi-billion parameter language models using model parallelism. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.08053.
4. Rajbhandari, S., Rasley, J., Ruwase, O., & He, Y. (2020). ZeRO: Memory optimizations toward training trillion parameter models. Proceedings of the International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1109/SC41405.2020.00024
5. Sergeev, A., & Del Balso, M. (2018). Horovod: Fast and easy distributed deep learning in TensorFlow. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.05799.
6. Alistarh, D., Grubic, D., Li, J., Tomioka, R., & Vojnovic, M. (2017). QSGD: Communication-efficient SGD via gradient quantization and encoding. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30, 1709–1720.
7. Li, S., Zhao, Y., Varma, R., Salpekar, O., Noordhuis, P., Li, T., Paszke, A., Smith, J., Vaughan, B., Damania, P., & Chintala, S. (2020). PyTorch Distributed: Experiences on accelerating data parallel training. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 13(12), 3005–3018. https://doi.org/10.14778/3415478.3415530
8. Lepikhin, D., Lee, H., Xu, Y., Krikun, M., Shazeer, N., & Chen, Z. (2021). GShard: Scaling giant models with conditional computation and automatic sharding. International Conference on Learning Representations.
9. Farrington, N., Porter, G., Radhakrishnan, S., Bazzaz, H. H., Subramanya, V., Fainman, Y., Papen, G., & Vahdat, A. (2010). Helios: A hybrid electrical/optical switch architecture for modular data centers. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 40(4), 339–350. https://doi.org/10.1145/1851182.1851223
10. Chen, K., Singla, A., Singh, A., Ramachandran, K., Xu, L., Zhang, Y., Wen, X., & Chen, Y. (2014). OSA: An optical switching architecture for data center networks with unprecedented flexibility. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 22(2), 498–511. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNET.2013.2253120
11. Kachris, C., & Tomkos, I. (2012). A survey on optical interconnects for data centers. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 14(4), 1021–1036. https://doi.org/10.1109/SURV.2011.122111.00069
12. Poutievski, L., Mashayekhi, O., Tikhomirov, A., Rojas-Cessa, R., Mokhtari, M., & Vahdat, A. (2022). Jupiter evolving: Transforming Google's datacenter network via optical circuit switches and software-defined networking. Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2022 Conference, 66–85. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544216.3544265
13. Ghobadi, M., Mahajan, R., Phanishayee, A., Devanur, N., Kulkarni, J., Ranade, G., Blanche, P. A., Rastegarfar, H., Kilper, D., & Brendel, R. (2016). Projector: Agile reconfigurable data center interconnect. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGCOMM Conference, 216–229. https://doi.org/10.1145/2934872.2934911
14. Masanet, E., Shehabi, A., Lei, N., Smith, S., & Koomey, J. (2020). Recalibrating global data center energy-use estimates. Science, 367(6481), 984–986. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba3758
15. Strubell, E., Ganesh, A., & McCallum, A. (2019). Energy and policy considerations for deep learning in NLP. Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 3645–3650. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P19-1355
16. Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 610–623. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922
17. Zhou, Z., Dzieciol, H., Clark, K., Luo, Y., Richardson, D., Poletti, F., ... & Liu, Z. (2023). Low-latency wavelength-switched clock-synchronized intra-data center interconnects enabled by hollow core fiber. Optics Express, 31(15), 24739-24748.
18. Mitchell, M., Wu, S., Zaldivar, A., Barnes, P., Vasserman, L., Hutchinson, B., Spitzer, E., Raji, I. D., & Gebru, T. (2019). Model cards for model reporting. Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 220–229. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287596
19. Barroso, L. A., Clidaras, J., & Hölzle, U. (2013). The datacenter as a computer: An introduction to the design of warehouse-scale machines. Morgan & Claypool Publishers. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00516ED2V01Y201306CAC024
20. Greenberg, A., Hamilton, J., Maltz, D. A., & Patel, P. (2008). The cost of a cloud: Research problems in data center networks. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 39(1), 68–73. https://doi.org/10.1145/1496091.1496103
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Engineering Systems and Digital Innovation

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.