MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406158057 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2024.3522164

Density-Clustering Aggregation for Personalized Federated Learning With AI-Enabled Aerial and Edge Computing in UAVs

2025· article· en· W4406158057 on OpenAlexaff
Wei-Che Chien, Chih-Hsun Lin, Tianli Zhu, Cheng Dai, Sahil Garg, Amrit Mukherjee

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesSichuan Province Science and Technology Support ProgramNational Science Council
KeywordsComputer scienceDBSCANCluster analysisAdaptabilityEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionEdge computingData miningArtificial intelligenceMachine learningDistributed computingCorrelation clustering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research introduces the Density-Clustering based Aggregation for Personalized Federated Learning (DCPFL) algorithm, which utilizes DBSCAN clustering to enhance model accuracy in AI-enabled aerial and edge computing contexts, particularly for UAVs. The DCPFL framework promotes model sharing among clients, fostering the development of personalized and optimized models. DBSCAN is beneficial in automatically determining cluster numbers using EPS neighborhoods and MinPts, with parameter optimization achieved through cross-experimental analysis. We further refined the model exchange mechanism by integrating a moving average prediction model to optimize the timing of these exchanges. Tests conducted on three public datasets covering two different machine learning tasks show that DCPFL surpasses existing methods, offering greater accuracy and enhanced adaptability in varied data environments. Implementing this algorithm in UAV networks leverages AI capabilities in aerial and edge computing to efficiently balance personalized modeling requirements with high performance, showcasing its potential to push federated learning forward in complex and dynamic settings.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207