CRS-FL: Conditional Random Sampling for Communication-Efficient and Privacy-Preserving Federated Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Federated Learning (FL), a privacy-oriented distributed ML paradigm, is gaining great interest in the Internet of Things because of its capability to protect participants’ data privacy. Studies have been conducted to address the challenges of communication efficiency and privacy-preserving, which exist in standard FL. However, they cannot achieve the goal of making a tradeoff between communication efficiency and model accuracy while guaranteeing privacy. This paper proposes a Conditional Random Sampling (CRS) method and implements it into the standard FL (CRS-FL) to tackle the above-mentioned challenges. CRS explores a Poisson-sampling-based stochastic coefficient to achieve a higher probability of obtaining zero-gradient unbiasedly and then decreases the communication overhead effectively without model accuracy degradation. Moreover, we dig out the relaxation Local Differential Privacy (LDP) guarantee conditions of CRS theoretically. Extensive experiment results indicate that (1) in communication efficiency, CRS-FL performs better than the existing methods in metric accuracy per transmission byte without model accuracy reduction in more than 7% sampling ratio (# sampling size / # model size); (2) in privacy-preserving, CRS-FL achieves no accuracy reduction compared with LDP baselines while holding the efficiency, even exceeding them in model accuracy under more sampling ratio conditions.
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 | 0.018 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".