Cross-Cluster Federated Learning and Blockchain for Internet of Medical Things
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
Federated learning (FL) has been gaining popularity as a way to provide privacy-preserving data sharing for the Internet of Medical Things (IoMT). As a complementary, blockchain technology is used in recent literature to make FL secure. However, existing blockchain-based FL (BFL) solutions do not perform well when data in a BFL cluster are sparse. A direct solution is to collect as many devices as possible to establish a large BFL cluster. However, these devices may locate in geographically distant areas and be separated by great distance, which further results in high communication latency. The high latency will lead to BFL’s low system efficiency due to frequent communications in the blockchain consensus. In this article, we propose that the large cluster should be divided into multiple smaller clusters, each in its own geographical area and organized with a BFL. In this context, we propose CFL, a cross-cluster FL system facilitated by the cross-chain technique. CFL connects multiple BFL clusters, where only a few aggregated updates are transmitted over long distances across clusters, thus improving the system efficiency. The design of CFL focuses on a cross-chain consensus protocol, which guarantees the model updates to be exchanged securely across clusters. We carry out extensive experiments to evaluate CFL in comparison with BFL, and show both CFL’s feasibility and efficiency.
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 | 0.003 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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