Decentralized federated learning through proxy model sharing
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
Institutions in highly regulated domains such as finance and healthcare often have restrictive rules around data sharing. Federated learning is a distributed learning framework that enables multi-institutional collaborations on decentralized data with improved protection for each collaborator's data privacy. In this paper, we propose a communication-efficient scheme for decentralized federated learning called ProxyFL, or proxy-based federated learning. Each participant in ProxyFL maintains two models, a private model, and a publicly shared proxy model designed to protect the participant's privacy. Proxy models allow efficient information exchange among participants without the need of a centralized server. The proposed method eliminates a significant limitation of canonical federated learning by allowing model heterogeneity; each participant can have a private model with any architecture. Furthermore, our protocol for communication by proxy leads to stronger privacy guarantees using differential privacy analysis. Experiments on popular image datasets, and a cancer diagnostic problem using high-quality gigapixel histology whole slide images, show that ProxyFL can outperform existing alternatives with much less communication overhead and stronger privacy.
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 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.050 | 0.130 |
| 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