Federated Learning with Client Availability Budgets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Federated learning (FL) sheds light on efficiently and privately learning from massive Internet of Things (IoT) devices. However, the iterative training and aggregation pose additional stress on the limited energy and availability budgets of clients. In this paper, we discuss two types of availability budgets of IoT clients, including the timing to start participating in FL and the communication budgets due to their constrained energy. We theoretically analyze the effect of availability budgets on FL, based on the availability constraints, by leveraging a decaying quadratic function to prioritize learning from statistically heterogeneous clients during the initial training rounds. We also consider the effects of client availability in terms of their participation to find a balance among clients with varying availability. We present FedCAB, an algorithm applying our theoretical model for the probabilistic rankings of the available clients to select in each round of FL model aggregation. Numerical results show the effectiveness of FedCAB under label distribution skew with a limited communication budget and clients that join the learning process in later rounds. We release the source code of FedCAB at https://github.com/denoslab/FedCAB.
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 | 0.007 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".