FedCALM: Conflict-aware Layer-wise Mitigation for Selective Aggregation in Deeper Personalized Federated Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Server aggregation conflict is a key challenge in personalized federated learning (PFL). While existing PFL methods have achieved significant progress with shallow base models (e.g., four-layer CNNs), they often overlook the negative impacts of deeper base models on personalization mechanisms. In this paper, we identify the phenomenon of deep model degradation in PFL, where as base model depth increases, the model becomes more sensitive to local client data distributions, thereby exacerbating server aggregation conflicts and ultimately reducing overall model performance. Moreover, we show that these conflicts manifest in insufficient global average updates and mutual constraints between clients. Motivated by our analysis, we proposed a two-stage conflict-aware layer-wise mitigation algorithm (FedCALM), which first constructs a conflict-free global update to alleviate negative conflicts, and then maximizes the benefits of all clients through a conflict-aware strategy. Notably, our method naturally leads to a selective mechanism that balances the tradeoff between clients involved in aggregation and the tolerance for conflicts. Consequently, it can boost the positive contribution to the clients even with the greatest conflicts with the global update. Extensive experiments across multiple datasets and deeper base models demonstrate that FedCALM outperforms four state-of-the-art (SOTA) methods by up to 9.88% and seamlessly integrates into existing PFL methods with performance improvements of up to 9.01%.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".