Flashback: Understanding and Mitigating Forgetting in Federated Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Federated Learning (FL) addresses the growing need to perform large-scale model training directly on distributed data sources, eliminating the overhead and privacy risks of transferring data to a central location. However, in FL, forgetting (or the loss of knowledge across rounds) hampers algorithm convergence, especially in the presence of severe data heterogeneity among clients. This study explores the nuances of this issue, emphasizing the critical role of forgetting leading to FL's inefficient learning within heterogeneous data contexts. Knowledge loss occurs in both client-local updates and server-side aggregation steps; addressing one without the other fails to mitigate forgetting. We introduce a metric to measure forgetting granularly, ensuring distinct recognition amid new knowledge acquisition. Based on this, we propose Flashback, a novel FL algorithm with a dynamic distillation approach that regularizes the local models and effectively aggregates their knowledge. The results from extensive experimentation across different benchmarks show that Flashback mitigates forgetting and outperforms other state-of-the-art methods, achieving faster round-to-target accuracy by converging in 6 to 16 rounds, being up to$27 \times$faster.
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 | 0.007 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".