MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391853798 · doi:10.1109/tmc.2024.3365951

CPPer-FL: Clustered Parallel Training for Efficient Personalized Federated Learning

2024· article· en· W4391853798 on OpenAlexaff
Ran Zhang, Fangqi Liu, Jiang Liu, Mingzhe Chen, Qinqin Tang, Tao Huang, F. Richard Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceTraining (meteorology)Computer architectureMultimediaDistributed computingComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a clustered parallel training algorithm is designed for personalized federated learning (Per-FL), called CPPer-FL. CPPer-FL improves the communication and training efficiency of Per-FL from two perspectives, namely, less burden for the central server and lower interaction idling delay. CPPer-FL adopts a client-edge-center learning architecture, which offloads the central server's model aggregation and communication burden to distributed edge servers. Also, CPPer-FL redesigns the cascading model synchronization and updating procedure in conventional Per-FL and changes it to a parallel manner, thus improving the interaction efficiency in the training process. Further, for the proposed hierarchical architecture, two approaches are proposed to cater to Per-FL: similarity-based clustering for client-edge association and personalized model aggregation for parallel model updating, such that clients' personal features can be preserved in the training process. The convergence of CPPer-FL has been formally analyzed and proved. Evaluation results validate the communication efficiency, model convergence, and model accuracy improvement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.773
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0050.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Mobile ComputingSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207