Privacy-Enhanced Federated Learning: A Restrictively Self-Sampled and Data-Perturbed Local Differential Privacy Method
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
As a popular distributed learning framework, federated learning (FL) enables clients to conduct cooperative training without sharing data, thus having higher security and enjoying benefits in processing large-scale, high-dimensional data. However, by sharing parameters in the federated learning process, the attacker can still obtain private information from the sensitive data of participants by reverse parsing. Local differential privacy (LDP) has recently worked well in preserving privacy for federated learning. However, it faces the inherent problem of balancing privacy, model performance, and algorithm efficiency. In this paper, we propose a novel privacy-enhanced federated learning framework (Optimal LDP-FL) which achieves local differential privacy protection by the client self-sampling and data perturbation mechanisms. We theoretically analyze the relationship between the model accuracy and client self-sampling probability. Restrictive client self-sampling technology is proposed which eliminates the randomness of the self-sampling probability settings in existing studies and improves the utilization of the federated system. A novel, efficiency-optimized LDP data perturbation mechanism (Adaptive-Harmony) is also proposed, which allows an adaptive parameter range to reduce variance and improve model accuracy. Comprehensive experiments on the MNIST and Fashion MNIST datasets show that the proposed method can significantly reduce computational and communication costs with the same level of privacy and model utility.
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 | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| 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 | 0.030 | 0.172 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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