ICAFS: Inter-Client-Aware Feature Selection for Vertical Federated Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vertical federated learning (VFL) enables a paradigm for vertically partitioned data across clients to collaboratively train machine learning models. Feature selection (FS) plays a crucial role in Vertical Federated Learning (VFL) due to the unique nature that data are distributed across multiple clients. In VFL, different clients possess distinct subsets of features for overlapping data samples, making the process of identifying and selecting the most relevant features a complex yet essential task. Previous FS efforts have primarily revolved around intra-client feature selection, overlooking vital feature interaction across clients, leading to subpar model outcomes. We introduce ICAFS, a novel multi-stage ensemble approach for effective FS in VFL by considering inter-client interactions. By employing conditional feature synthesis alongside multiple learnable feature selectors, ICAFS facilitates ensemble FS over these selectors using synthetic embeddings. This method bypasses the limitations of private gradient sharing and allows for model training using real data with refined embeddings. Experiments on multiple real-world datasets demonstrate that ICAFS surpasses current state-of-the-art methods in prediction 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.018 | 0.108 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".