Poisoning Attacks in Federated Edge Learning for Digital Twin 6G-Enabled IoTs: An Anticipatory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Federated edge learning can be essential in supporting privacy-preserving, artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled activities in digital twin 6G-enabled Internet of Things (IoT) environments. However, we need to also consider the potential of attacks targeting the underlying AI systems (e.g., adversaries seek to corrupt data on the IoT devices during local updates or corrupt the model updates); hence, in this article, we propose an anticipatory study for poisoning attacks in federated edge learning for digital twin 6G-enabled IoT environments. Specifically, we study the influence of adversaries on the training and development of federated learning models in digital twin 6G-enabled IoT environments. We demonstrate that attackers can carry out poisoning attacks in two different learning settings, namely: centralized learning and federated learning, and successful attacks can severely reduce the model's accuracy. We comprehensively evaluate the attacks on a new cyber security dataset designed for IoT applications with three deep neural networks under the non-independent and identically distributed (Non-IID) data and the independent and identically distributed (IID) data. The poisoning attacks, on an attack classification problem, can lead to a decrease in accuracy from 94.93% to 85.98% with IID data and from 94.18% to 30.04% with Non-IID.
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 | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; 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".