Cross-Cluster Federated Learning and Blockchain for Internet of Medical Things
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".