MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7045262935

Bayesian Federated Learning in Predictive Space

2023· dissertation· en· W7045262935 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsBlackberry (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayesian probabilityConstraint (computer-aided design)Aggregate (composite)Training setEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionBayesian inferenceSpace (punctuation)Federated learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Federated Learning (FL) involves training a model over a dataset distributed among clients, with the constraint that each client's data is private. This paradigm is useful in settings where different entities own different training points, such as when training on data stored on multiple edge devices. Within this setting, small and noisy datasets are common, which highlights the need for well-calibrated models which are able to represent the uncertainty in their predictions. Alongside this, two other important goals for a practical FL algorithm are 1) that it has low communication costs, operating over only a few rounds of communication, and 2) that it achieves good performance when client datasets are distributed differently from each other (are heterogeneous). Among existing FL techniques, the closest to achieving such goals include Bayesian FL methods which collect parameter samples from local posteriors, and aggregate them to approximate the global posterior. These provide uncertainty estimates, more naturally handle data heterogeneity owing to their Bayesian nature, and can operate in a single round of communication. Of these techniques, many make inaccurate approximations to the high-dimensional posterior over parameters which in turn negatively effects their uncertainty estimates. A Bayesian technique known as the ``Bayesian Committee Machine" (BCM), originally introduced outside the FL context, remedies some of these issues by aggregating the Bayesian posteriors in the lower dimensional predictive space instead. \n \nThe BCM, in its original form, is impractical for FL due to requiring a large ensemble for inference. We first argue that it is well-suited for heterogeneous FL, then propose a modification to the BCM algorithm, involving distillation, to make it practical for FL. We demonstrate that this modified method outperforms other techniques as heterogeneity increases. We then demonstrate theoretical issues with the calibration of the BCM, namely that it is systematically overconfident. We remedy this by proposing β-Predictive Bayes, a Bayesian FL algorithm which performs a modified aggregation of the local predictive posteriors, using a tunable parameter β. β is tuned to improve the global model's calibration, before it is distilled. We empirically evaluate this method on a number of regression and classification datasets to demonstrate that it generally better calibrated than other baselines, over a range of heterogeneous data partitions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207