Federated Learning and Differential Privacy Techniques on Multi-hospital Population-scale Electrocardiogram Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research paper explores ways to apply Federated Learning (FL) and Differential Privacy (DP) techniques to population-scale Electrocardiogram (ECG) data. The study learns a multi-label ECG classification model using FL and DP based on 1,565,849 ECG tracings from 7 hospitals in Alberta, Canada. The FL approach allowed collaborative model training without sharing raw data between hospitals, while building robust ECG classification models for diagnosing various cardiac conditions. These accurate ECG classification models can facilitate the diagnoses while preserving patient confidentiality using FL and DP techniques. Our results show that the performance achieved using our implementation of the FL approach is comparable to that of the pooled approach, where the model is trained over the aggregating data from all hospitals. Furthermore, our findings suggest that hospitals with limited ECGs for training can benefit from adopting the FL model compared to single-site training. In addition, this study showcases the trade-off between model performance and data privacy by employing DP during model training. Our code is available at https://github.com/vikhyatt/Hospital-FL-DP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.058 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".