MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399333454 · doi:10.1145/3655693.3660252

An Enhanced Combinatorial Contextual Neural Bandit Approach for Client Selection in Federated Learning

2024· article· en· W4399333454 on OpenAlexaff
Xiangyu Ma, Wei Shi, Junfeng Wen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersUniversitas Brawijaya
KeywordsComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)Machine learningMetric (unit)Artificial intelligenceSelection (genetic algorithm)Context (archaeology)Raw dataProcess (computing)AdversaryData miningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the evolving landscape of machine learning (ML), federated learning (FL) stands out as an innovative strategy for training models across dispersed devices without centralizing raw data. Such an approach, however, grapples with data heterogeneity challenges, violating the independent and identically distributed (IID) assumption and undermining the global model accuracy. To address this, we present federated adversary-resilient neural selector (FANS), a sophisticated context-aware client selection algorithm, leveraging a combinatorial contextual neural bandit framework. This algorithm that accentuates the enhanced extraction of contextual information by evaluating each local client with a universally standardized dataset, subsequently yielding a more insightful contextual representation tailored for federated settings. In addition, we introduce selection robustness score (SRS), a novel metric designed to quantify the efficacy of client selection in the presence of adversarial conditions. Using this metric, we demonstrate FANS’s effectiveness in enhancing the FL process. Empirical evaluations across diverse settings reveal our method’s superiority over current state-of-the-art solutions, with significant improvements in both SRS and global model accuracy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.913

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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