Clustered Vehicular Federated Learning: Process and Optimization
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) is expected to play a prominent role for privacy-preserving machine learning (ML) in autonomous vehicles. FL involves the collaborative training of a single ML model among edge devices on their distributed datasets while keeping data locally. While FL requires less communication compared to classical distributed learning, it remains hard to scale for large models. In vehicular networks, FL must be adapted to the limited communication resources, the mobility of the edge nodes, and the statistical heterogeneity of data distributions. Indeed, a judicious utilization of the communication resources alongside new perceptive learning-oriented methods are vital. To this end, we propose a new architecture for vehicular FL and corresponding learning and scheduling processes. The architecture utilizes vehicular-to-vehicular(V2V) resources to bypass the communication bottleneck where clusters of vehicles train models simultaneously and only the aggregate of each cluster is sent to the multi-access edge (MEC) server. The cluster formation is adapted for single and multi-task learning, and takes into account both communication and learning aspects. We show through simulations that the proposed process is capable of improving the learning accuracy in several non-independent and-identically-distributed (non-i.i.d) and unbalanced datasets distributions, under mobility constraints, in comparison to standard FL.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| 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