MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388106271 · doi:10.1145/3616392.3624701

Trust-based Knowledge Sharing Among Federated Learning Servers in Vehicular Edge Computing

2023· article· en· W4388106271 on OpenAlexaff
Shahram Shah Heydari, Khalil El‐Khatib

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsServerComputer scienceEdge computingEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionLocalityMetric (unit)Distributed computingComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Federated Learning (FL) protects privacy during autonomous vehicle machine learning (ML) operations. FL enables cooperative training of a single ML model across multiple edge devices, leveraging distributed datasets while maintaining data locality. Although much research has concentrated on single-server FL for autonomous driving applications within vehicular networks, real-world scenarios often involve several concurrent servers capable of benefiting from each other's knowledge. However, these servers' trustworthiness is paramount when using their global models, as an imprudent choice could significantly decrease FL performance and accuracy. In this paper, we introduce a novel trust-based knowledge-sharing approach among FL servers, wherein the accuracy of shared global models on clients' local data serves as the trust metric. Our proposed methodology enables servers to utilize shared global models from reliable servers for their clients, thereby improving training accuracy and reducing loss. This enhancement is particularly notable during the initial training rounds compared to base FL implementation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207