When Information Freshness Meets Service Latency in Federated Learning: A Task-Aware Incentive Scheme for Smart Industries
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For several industrial applications, a sole data owner may lack sufficient training samples to train effective machine learning based models. As such, we propose a federated learning (FL) based approach to promote privacy-preserving collaborative machine learning for applications in smart industries. In our system model, a model owner initiates an FL task involving a group of workers, i.e., data owners, to perform model training on their locally stored data before transmitting the model updates for aggregation. There exists a tradeoff between service latency, i.e., the time taken for the training request to be completed, and age of information (AoI), i.e., the time elapsed between data aggregation from the deployed industrial Internet of Things devices to completion of the FL-based training. On one hand, if the data are collected only upon the model owner's request, the AoI is low. On the other hand, the service latency incurred is more significant. Furthermore, given that different training tasks may have varying AoI requirements, we propose a contract-theoretic task-aware incentive scheme that can be calibrated based on the weighted preferences of the model owner toward AoI and service latency. The performance evaluation validates the incentive compatibility of our contract amid information asymmetry, and shows the flexibility of our proposed scheme toward satisfying varying preferences of AoI and service latency.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it