Enhancing Heart Disease Prediction with Federated Learning and Blockchain Integration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Federated learning offers a framework for developing local models across institutions while safeguarding sensitive data. This paper introduces a novel approach for heart disease prediction using the TabNet model, which combines the strengths of tree-based models and deep neural networks. Our study utilizes the Comprehensive Heart Disease and UCI Heart Disease datasets, leveraging TabNet’s architecture to enhance data handling in federated environments. Horizontal federated learning was implemented using the federated averaging algorithm to securely aggregate model updates across participants. Blockchain technology was integrated to enhance transparency and accountability, with smart contracts automating governance. The experimental results demonstrate that TabNet achieved the highest balanced metrics score of 1.594 after 50 epochs, with an accuracy of 0.822 and an epsilon value of 6.855, effectively balancing privacy and performance. The model also demonstrated strong accuracy with only 10 iterations on aggregated data, highlighting the benefits of multi-source data integration. This work presents a scalable, privacy-preserving solution for heart disease prediction, combining TabNet and blockchain to address key healthcare challenges while ensuring data integrity.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".