Blockchain-Supported Federated Learning for Trustworthy Vehicular Networks
Abstract
The advances in today's IoT devices and machine learning methods have given rise to the concept of Federated Learning. Through such a technique, a plethora of network devices collaboratively train and update a mutual machine learning model while protecting their individual data-sets. Federated learning proves its effectiveness in tackling communication efficiency and privacy-safeguarding issues. Moreover, blockchain was introduced to solve many network issues in regard to data privacy and network single point of failure. In this article, we introduce a solution that integrates both federated learning and blockchain to ensure both data privacy and network security. We present a framework to decentralize the mutual machine learning models on end-devices. A blockchain-based consensus solution as a second line of privacy is used to ensure trustworthy shared training on the fog. The proposed model enables on-end device machine learning without any centralized training of the data nor coordination by utilizing a consensus method in the blockchain. We evaluate and verify our proposed model through simulation to showcase the effectiveness of the adapted scheme in terms of accuracy, energy consumption, and lifetime rate, along with throughput and latency metrics. The proposed model performs with an accuracy rate of ≈ 0.97.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Study [105] proposes a blockchain-supported FL framework to detect and mitigate malicious behaviors by distributing ML models across devices and secure training with blockchain consensus.
“Study [105] proposes a blockchain-supported FL framework to detect and mitigate malicious behaviors by distributing ML models across devices and secure training with blockchain consensus.”
From Privacy-preserving Machine Learning in Internet of Vehicle Applications: Fundamentals, Recent Advances, and Future Direction (2025) · cites this paper as [105]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 27 · Cited by 92
- Authors
- Otoum, S., Al Ridhawi, I., & Mouftah, H. T.
- Affiliations
- Zayed University (AE)
- kuwait College of Science and Technology,Kuwait
- University of Ottawa (CA)
- Venue
- GLOBECOM 2020 - 2020 IEEE Global Communications Conference
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2020-12
- Pages
- 1-6
- ISSN
- 1930-529X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3123346250
- Cited by
- 92
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 13.46
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Globecom (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)
- Keywords
- federated learning, blockchain, vehicular networks, data privacy, consensus algorithms, fog computing, decentralized machine learning, network security, Internet of Things
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review