Dynamic Contract Design for Federated Learning in Smart Healthcare Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, the data collected by the Internet of Healthcare Things, i.e., healthcare oriented Internet of Things (IoT), still rely on cloud-based centralized data aggregation and processing. To reduce the need for transmission of data to the cloud, the edge computing architecture may be adopted to facilitate machine learning at the edge of the network through leveraging on the amassed computation resources of pervasive IoT devices. In this article, federated learning (FL) is proposed to enable privacy-preserving collaborative model training at the edge of the network across distributed IoT users. However, the users in the FL network may have different willingness to participate (WTP), a hidden information unknown to the model owner. Furthermore, the development of healthcare applications typically requires sustainable user participation, e.g., for the continuous collection of data during which a user’s WTP may change over time. As such, we leverage on the dynamic contract design to consider a two-period incentive mechanism that satisfies the intertemporal incentive compatibility (IIC), such that the self-revealing mechanism of the contract holds across both periods. The performance evaluation shows that our contract design satisfies the IIC constraints and derives greater profits than that of the uniform pricing scheme, thus validating its effectiveness in mitigating the adverse impacts of the information asymmetry.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".