MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402642689 · doi:10.3390/electronics13183716

A Maneuver in the Trade-Off Space of Federated Learning Aggregation Frameworks Secured with Polymorphic Encryption: PolyFLAM and PolyFLAP Frameworks

2024· article· en· W4402642689 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Moshawrab, Mehdi Adda, Abdenour Bouzouane, Hussein Ibrahim, Ali Raad

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsCegep de Sept IlesUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEncryptionSpace (punctuation)Computer scienceBusinessDistributed computingComputer networkOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maintaining user privacy in machine learning is a critical concern due to the implications of data collection. Federated learning (FL) has emerged as a promising solution by sharing trained models rather than user data. However, FL still faces several challenges, particularly in terms of security and privacy, such as vulnerability to inference attacks. There is an inherent trade-off between communication traffic across the network and computational costs on the server or client, which this paper aims to address by maneuvering between these performance parameters. To tackle these issues, this paper proposes two complementary frameworks: PolyFLAM (“Polymorphic Federated Learning Aggregation of Models”) and PolyFLAP (“Polymorphic Federated Learning Aggregation of Parameters”). These frameworks provide two options to suit the needs of users, depending on whether they prioritize reducing communication across the network or lowering computational costs on the server or client. PolyFLAM reduces computational costs by exchanging entire models, eliminating the need to rebuild models from parameters. In contrast, PolyFLAP reduces communication costs by transmitting only model parameters, which are smaller in size compared to entire models. Both frameworks are supported by polymorphic encryption, ensuring privacy is maintained even in cases of key leakage. Furthermore, these frameworks offer five different machine learning models, including support vector machines, logistic regression, Gaussian naïve Bayes, stochastic gradient descent, and multi-layer perceptron, to cover as many real-life problems as possible. The evaluation of these frameworks with simulated and real-life datasets demonstrated that they can effectively withstand various attacks, including inference attacks that aim to compromise user privacy by capturing exchanged models or parameters.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicCryptography and Data SecurityFrench-language works237,207