AI at the Edge: Blockchain-Empowered Secure Multiparty Learning With Heterogeneous Models
Abstract
Edge computing, an emerging computing paradigm pushing data computing and storing to network edges, enables many applications that require high computing complexity, scalability, and security. In the big data era, one of the most critical applications is multiparty learning or federated learning, which allows different parties to collaborate with each other to obtain better learning models without sharing their own data. However, there are several main concerns about the current multiparty learning systems. First, most existing systems are distributed and need a central server to coordinate the learning process. However, such a central server can easily become a single point of failure and may not be trustworthy. Second, although quite a few schemes have been proposed to study Byzantine attacks, a very common and challenging kind of attack in distributed systems, they generally consider the scenario of learning a global model. However, in fact, all parties in multiparty learning usually have their own local models. The learning methods and security issues, in this case, are not fully explored. In this article, we propose a novel blockchain-empowered decentralized secure multiparty learning system with heterogeneous local models called BEMA. Particularly, we consider two types of Byzantine attacks, and carefully design “off-chain sample mining” and “on-chain mining ” schemes to protect the security of the proposed system. We theoretically prove the system performance bound and resilience under Byzantine attacks. The simulation results show that the proposed system obtains comparable performance with that of conventional distributed systems, and bounded performance in the case of Byzantine attacks.
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?
The BEMA scheme is efficient in terms of prediction accuracy under attacks compared to the baseline models.
“The simulation results on the MNIST dataset show that the BEMA scheme is efficient in term of prediction accuracy under attacks compared to the baseline models.”
From Federated Deep Learning for Cyber Security in the Internet of Things: Concepts, Applications, and Experimental Analysis (2021) · cites this paper as [102]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 36 · Cited by 70
- Authors
- Wang, Q., Guo, Y., Wang, X., Ji, T., Yu, L., & Li, P.
- Affiliations
- Case Western Reserve University (US)
- Venue
- IEEE Internet of Things Journal
- Published
- 2020-10
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 9600-9610
- ISSN
- 2327-4662 (ISSN-L)
- 2372-2541
- OpenAlex
- W3016682614
- Cited by
- 70
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 4.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE Internet of Things Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Cryptography and Data Security
- Keywords
- federated learning, blockchain, edge computing, Byzantine attacks, decentralized learning, single point of failure, BEMA
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