MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015515533 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2020.2985694

Hierarchical Incentive Mechanism Design for Federated Machine Learning in Mobile Networks

2020· article· en· W3015515533 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSingapore University of Technology and DesignNational Research Foundation SingaporeMinistry of Education, IndiaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceIncentiveIncentive compatibilityMechanism designContract theoryLeverage (statistics)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceComputer securityDistributed computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the enhanced sensing and computation capabilities of Internet-of-Things (IoT) devices have opened the doors to several mobile crowdsensing applications. In mobile crowdsensing, a model owner announces a sensing task following which interested workers collect the required data. However, in some cases, a model owner may have insufficient data samples to build an effective machine learning model. To this end, we propose a federated learning (FL)-based privacy-preserving approach to facilitate collaborative machine learning among multiple model owners in mobile crowdsensing. Our system model allows collaborative machine learning without compromising data privacy given that only the model parameters instead of the raw data are exchanged within the federation. However, there are two main challenges of incentive mismatches between workers and model owners, as well as among model owners. For the former, we leverage on the self-revealing mechanism in the contract theory under information asymmetry. For the latter, to ensure the stability of a federation through preventing free-riding attacks, we use the coalitional game theory approach that rewards model owners based on their marginal contributions. Considering the inherent hierarchical structure of the involved entities, we propose a hierarchical incentive mechanism framework. Using the backward induction, we first solve the contract formulation and then proceed to solve the coalitional game with the merge and split algorithm. The numerical results validate the performance efficiency of our proposed hierarchical incentive mechanism design, in terms of incentive compatibility of our contract design and fair payoffs of model owners in stable federation formation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0110.010
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it