MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405022246 · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3511430

Adaptive Asynchronous Split Federated Learning for Medical Image Segmentation

2024· article· en· W4405022246 on OpenAlexafffund
Chamani Shiranthika, Hadi Hadizadeh, Parvaneh Saeedi, Ivan V. Bajić

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceImage segmentationAsynchronous communicationArtificial intelligenceComputer visionSegmentationImage (mathematics)Asynchronous learningComputer networkSynchronous learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Split federated (SplitFed) learning offers promise for collaborative machine learning across decentralized and resource-constrained clients (edge devices, nodes, or organizations) in various applications, including healthcare. However, real-world challenges arise in heterogeneous environments where clients experience communication-related data losses, differ in computational capabilities, and have varying local dataset sizes. In this paper, we introduce adaptive asynchronous split federated learning (AASFL), an innovative training scheme to address such challenges. AASFL blends asynchronous SplitFed learning with client-level adaptability, acknowledging varying client capabilities. In AASFL, each client independently adapts its learning rate and the number of local training epochs based on its local training speed, dataset size, and packet loss probability. To demonstrate the effectiveness of AASFL, we implement and evaluate it on a SplitFed network architecture for medical image segmentation. Moreover, we demonstrate the validity of AASFL by emphasizing the necessity of training each client in the collaborative network and revealing drawbacks of client selection. The results on two public datasets indicate that it greatly enhances global model performance, leading to more accurate segmentation results. We also statistically show that AASFL outperforms the standard SplitFed. Furthermore, we provide a theoretical convergence analysis of AASFL. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first analysis of SplitFed in an adaptive, asynchronous setting. The proposed AASFL training scheme offers a promising avenue for improving medical image segmentation tasks in practical decentralized learning environments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0130.014
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.307 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207