Convergence-Privacy-Fairness Trade-Off in Personalized Federated Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Personalized federated learning (PFL), e.g., the renowned Ditto, strikes a balance between personalization and generalization by conducting federated learning (FL) to guide personalized learning (PL). While FL is unaffected by personalized model training, in Ditto, PL depends on the outcome of the FL. However, the clients’ concern about their privacy and consequent perturbation of their local models can affect the convergence and (performance) fairness of PL. This paper presents PFL, called DP-Ditto, which is a non-trivial extension of Ditto under the protection of differential privacy (DP), and analyzes the trade-off among its privacy guarantee, model convergence, and performance distribution fairness. We also analyze the convergence upper bound of the personalized models under DP-Ditto and derive the optimal number of global aggregations given a privacy budget. Further, we analyze the performance fairness of the personalized models, and reveal the feasibility of optimizing DP-Ditto jointly for convergence and fairness. Experiments validate our analysis and demonstrate that DP-Ditto can surpass the DP-perturbed versions of the state-of-the-art PFL models, such as FedAMP, pFedMe, APPLE, and FedALA, by over 32.71% in fairness and 9.66% in accuracy.
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 | 0.011 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".