Multi‐Objective Optimisation Framework for Heterogeneous Federated Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Federated learning is a distributed framework that trains a centralised model using data from multiple clients without transferring that data to a central server. Despite rapid progress, federated learning still faces several unsolved challenges. Specifically, communication costs and system heterogeneity, such as nonidentical data distribution, hinder federated learning's progress. Several approaches have recently emerged for federated learning involving heterogeneous clients with varying computational capabilities (namely, heterogeneous federated learning). However, heterogeneous federated learning faces two key challenges: optimising model size and determining client selection ratios. Moreover, efficiently aggregating local models from clients with diverse capabilities is crucial for addressing system heterogeneity and communication efficiency. This paper proposes an evolutionary multiobjective optimisation framework for heterogeneous federated learning (MOHFL) to address these issues. Our approach elegantly formulates and solves a biobjective optimisation problem that minimises communication cost and model error rate. The decision variables in this framework comprise model sizes and client selection ratios for each Q client cluster, yielding a total of 2 Q optimisation parameters to be tuned. We develop a partition‐based strategy for MOHFL that segregates clients into clusters based on their communication and computation capabilities. Additionally, we implement an adaptive model sizing mechanism that dynamically assigns appropriate subnetwork architectures to clients based on their computational constraints. We also propose a unified aggregation framework to combine models of varying sizes from heterogeneous clients effectively. Extensive experiments on multiple datasets demonstrate the effectiveness and superiority of our proposed method compared to existing approaches.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".