MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409014625 · doi:10.1109/mcom.001.2400062

SGAN-RA: Reconstruction Attack for Big Model in Asynchronous Federated Learning

2025· article· en· W4409014625 on OpenAlexaff
Kehao Wang, Hao Zhang, Georges Kaddoum, Hyundong Shin, Tony Q. S. Quek, Moe Z. Win

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Magazine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceAsynchronous communicationAsynchronous learningComputer networkDistributed computingComputer securitySynchronous learningTeaching method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Federated learning (FL) is a distributed learning framework designed for large-scale applications. The core advantage of FL is that each participant is not required to share the local data with a central server. This inherent privacy-preserving capability is well suited to the increasingly popular large-scale generative AI models. However, some studies have shown that FL is susceptible to reconstruction attacks, in which an attacker leverages the acquired gradients or model parameters to reconstruct a victim's data. In this article, we propose a novel reconstruction attack scheme based on generative adversarial networks (GANs) in an asynchronous FL scenario that can reconstruct a victim's dataset without an auxiliary dataset. This adversarial scheme demonstrates a significant ability to reconstruct a dataset of victims accurately, thereby posing a substantial threat to user privacy, particularly in the context of large-scale models. Furthermore, we explore various defense mechanisms based on the characteristics of asynchronous FL and ultimately establish a viable defense scheme based on homomorphic encryption and an intermediate server. The proposed defense framework successfully and flawlessly defends against reconstruction attacks from the server side in an asynchronous setting without degradation of the model performance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Communications MagazineSame topicCryptography and Data SecurityFrench-language works237,207