Enabling SQL-based training data debugging for federated learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How can we debug a logistic regression model in a federated learning setting when seeing the model behave unexpectedly (e.g., the model rejects all high-income customers' loan applications)? The SQL-based training data debugging framework has proved effective to fix this kind of issue in a non-federated learning setting. Given an unexpected query result over model predictions, this framework automatically removes the label errors from training data such that the unexpected behavior disappears in the retrained model. In this paper, we enable this powerful framework for federated learning. The key challenge is how to develop a security protocol for federated debugging which is proved to be secure, efficient, and accurate. Achieving this goal requires us to investigate how to seamlessly integrate the techniques from multiple fields (Databases, Machine Learning, and Cybersecurity). We first propose FedRain, which extends Rain, the state-of-the-art SQL-based training data debugging framework, to our federated learning setting. We address several technical challenges to make FedRain work and analyze its security guarantee and time complexity. The analysis results show that FedRain falls short in terms of both efficiency and security. To overcome these limitations, we redesign our security protocol and propose Frog, a novel SQL-based training data debugging framework tailored for federated learning. Our theoretical analysis shows that Frog is more secure, more accurate, and more efficient than FedRain. We conduct extensive experiments using several real-world datasets and a case study. The experimental results are consistent with our theoretical analysis and validate the effectiveness of Frog in practice.
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 | 0.018 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".