Agent-oriented Joint Decision Support for Data Owners in Auction-based Federated Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Auction-based Federated Learning (AFL) has attracted extensive research interest due to its ability to motivate data owners (DOs) to join FL through economic means. While many existing AFL methods focus on providing decision support to model users (MUs) and the AFL auctioneer, decision support for data owners remains open. To bridge this gap, we propose a first-of-its-kind agent-oriented joint Pricing, Acceptance and Sub-delegation decision support approach for data owners in AFL (PAS-AFL). By considering a DO's current reputation, pending FL tasks, willingness to train FL models, and its trust relationships with other DOs, it provides a systematic approach for a DO to make joint decisions on AFL bid acceptance, task sub-delegation and pricing based on Lyapunov optimization to maximize its utility. It is the first to enable each DO to take on multiple FL tasks simultaneously to earn higher income for DOs and enhance the throughput of FL tasks in the AFL ecosystem. Extensive experiments based on six benchmarking datasets demonstrate significant advantages of PAS-AFL compared to six alternative strategies, beating the best baseline by 28.77% and 2.64% on average in terms of utility and test accuracy of the resulting FL models, respectively.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".