Towards Instant Clustering Approach for Federated Learning Client Selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In just few years, Federated Learning (FL) started to gain unprecedented attention given its ability to solve some fundamental privacy and communication challenges of traditional machine learning. Client selection is one of the main challenges in FL and is usually done in a random fashion, where the central server arbitrarily selects a certain number of clients to participate in each training round. However, given the heterogeneity of the client devices in terms of data quality and resource availability, randomly selecting clients is likely to result in long local training time and thus delayed global model’s convergence. To address this problem, in this work, we propose a real-time and on-demand client selection mechanism that employs the DBSCAN (Density-Based Spatial clustering of Applications with Noise) clustering technique from machine learning to group the clients into a set of homogeneous clusters based on a set of criteria defined by the FL task owners, such as resource availability, data quality, data size, data freshness and non-IID degree. Based on the requirements of each FL task, the server then intelligently selects the clusters of clients that best match with each task’s requirements, thus improving the performance of the overall federated learning process. Experiments suggest that our solution significantly improves the accuracy of FL compared to the Vanilla FL approach.
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 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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.032 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".