Differentially Private and Heterogeneity-Robust Federated Learning With Theoretical Guarantee
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Federated learning (FL) is a popular distributed paradigm where enormous clients collaboratively train a machine learning (ML) model under the orchestration of a central server without knowing the clients’ private raw data. The development of effective FL algorithms faces multiple practical challenges including data heterogeneity and clients’ privacy protection. Despite that numerous attempts have been made to deal with data heterogeneity or rigorous privacy protection, none have effectively tackled both issues simultaneously. In this article, we propose a differentially private and heterogeneity-robust FL algorithm, namedDP-FedCVRto mitigate the data heterogeneity by following the client-variance-reduction strategy. Besides, it adopts a sophisticated differential privacy (DP) mechanism where the privacy-amplified strategy is applied, to achieve a rigorous privacy protection guarantee. We show that the proposedDP-FedCVRalgorithm maintains its heterogeneity-robustness though DP noises are incorporated, while achieving a sublinear convergence rate for a nonconvex FL problem. Numerical experiments based on image classification tasks are presented to demonstrate thatDP-FedCVRprovides superior performance over the benchmark algorithms in the presence of data heterogeneity and various DP privacy budgets.
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 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".