A Stackelberg Game-based Wireless Powered Federated Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By sharing model parameters instead of raw data to train machine models, Federated Learning (FL) can protect End equipment Workers (EWs)’ data privacy. However, due to energy constraints and selfishness, EWs may not be willing to participate or train slowly, which affects the performance of global FL model. To address these issues, we propose a three-stage Stackelberg game-based wireless powered FL framework to incentivize all players to participate in the system while ensuring the successful completion of FL tasks. Specifically, Base Station (BS) publishes the FL task and wants to obtain a better FL model at a lower cost. EWs train local FL models, and want to get more payment with less energy consumption. When EWs train and upload their local models, Charging Service Provider (CSP) transmits energy to them via Wireless Power Transfer (WPT) while charging fees. In order to obtain the optimal strategy for all participants, we analyze the proposed game problem using the backward induction method. Meanwhile, we prove that the unique Stackelberg equilibrium and Nash equilibrium can be obtained, and we obtain the approximate optimal solution of BS using the subgradient method. Finally, extensive simulations are conducted to evaluate the performance of the proposed method in different scenarios. The results show that the proposed method improves the utility of three parties by an average of 19.09% - 51.86% compared with the benchmark methods.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".