Synthetic Tabular Data Generation Under Horizontal Federated Learning Environments in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Case-Based Simulation Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Data scarcity and dispersion pose significant obstacles in biomedical research, particularly when addressing rare diseases. In such scenarios, synthetic data generation (SDG) has emerged as a promising path to mitigate the first issue. Concurrently, federated learning is a machine learning paradigm where multiple nodes collaborate to create a centralized model with knowledge that is distilled from the data in different nodes, but without the need for sharing it. This research explores the combination of SDG and federated learning technologies in the context of acute myeloid leukemia, a rare hematological disorder, evaluating their combined impact and the quality of the generated artificial datasets. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the privacy- and fidelity-related impact of horizontally federating SDG models in different data distribution scenarios and with different numbers of nodes, comparing them with centralized baseline SDG models. METHODS: Two state-of-the-art generative models, conditional tabular generative adversarial network and FedTabDiff, were trained considering four different scenarios: (1) a nonfederated baseline with all the data available, (2) a federated scenario where the data were evenly distributed among different nodes, (3) a federated scenario where the data were unevenly and randomly distributed (imbalanced data), and (4) a federated scenario with nonindependent and identically distributed data distributions. For each of the federated scenarios, a fixed set of node quantities (3, 5, 7, 10) was considered to assess its impact, and the generated data were evaluated, attending to a fidelity-privacy trade-off. RESULTS: The computed fidelity metrics exhibited statistically significant deteriorations (P<.001) up to 21% in the conditional tabular generative adversarial network and up to 62% in the FedTabDiff model due to the federation process. When comparing federated experiments trained with diverse numbers of nodes, no strong tendencies were observed, even if specific comparisons resulted in significative differences. Privacy metrics were mainly maintained while obtaining maximum improvements of 55% and maximum deteriorations of 26% between both models, although they were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Within the scope of the use case scenario in this paper, the act of horizontally federating SDG algorithms results in a loss of data fidelity compared to the nonfederated baseline while maintaining privacy levels. However, this deterioration does not significantly increase as the number of nodes used to train the models grows, even though significative differences were found in specific comparisons. The different data partition distribution configurations had no significant effect on the metrics, as similar tendencies were found for all scenarios.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».