Towards Privacy-preserving and Fairness-aware Federated Learning Framework
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Federated Learning (FL) enables the distributed training of a model across multiple data owners under the orchestration of a central server responsible for aggregating the models generated by the different clients. However, the original approach of FL has significant shortcomings related to privacy and fairness requirements. Specifically, the observation of the model updates may lead to privacy issues, such as membership inference attacks, while the use of imbalanced local datasets can introduce or amplify classification biases, especially for minority groups. In this work, we show that these biases can be exploited to increase the likelihood of privacy attacks against these groups. To do so, we propose a novel inference attack exploiting the knowledge of group fairness metrics during the training of the global model. Then to thwart this attack, we define a fairness-aware encrypted-domain aggregation algorithm that is differentially-private by design thanks to the approximate precision loss of the threshold multi-key CKKS homomorphic encryption scheme. Finally, we demonstrate the good performance of our proposal both in terms of fairness and privacy through experiments conducted over three real datasets.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 it