Cited by 36Blockchain Technology Applications and SecurityPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataIoT and Edge/Fog Computing

PD2S: A Privacy-Preserving Differentiated Data Sharing Scheme Based on Blockchain and Federated Learning

Liu, Yuan, Liu, Peng, Jing, Weipeng, Song, Houbing Herbert·2023·IEEE Internet of Things Journal

Abstract

With the rapid development of the Internet of Things (IoT), massive terminals and emerging applications bring a large amount of data. As an essential prerequisite for mining potential value from these data, data sharing is crucial and getting more and more attention. However, security and privacy concerns, and the lack of effective incentive mechanisms in the decentralized environment hinder the data owners from sharing their data. In this article, we propose a federated learning (FL) and blockchain-based privacy-preserving data sharing system, which solve the privacy leakage problem of FL and the scalability problem of blockchain by their technical complementarity. Considering the resource shortage and the heterogeneity of terminals, we first design a cross-layer architecture by exploiting the cloud–edge–terminal collaboration, and innovatively propose differential data sharing by dividing the providers into origin data providers and model providers. Then, we design a targeted incentive mechanism to maximize the utility of requesters and two types of data providers by formulating it into a two-stage Stackelberg game. Finally, a gradient-based algorithm is designed to get the optimal solution. Theoretical analysis and numerical simulations show that the proposed data-sharing system could eliminate privacy concerns and motivate more participants to share data. With 500 nodes, the differentiated data sharing scheme (DASC) is 1.72 s faster than the shared model scheme (SMC) and 2.59 s faster than SDC. In terms of utility of the requester, DASC is$2.0 \times {10^{3}}$higher than SDC, and 9.27 higher than SMC in average utility of providers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/jiot.2023.3295763

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Federated learning handles device failures and data corruption robustly, continuing with minimal disruption because it relies on numerous other devices that persist in their local computations.

    “Additionally, FL is designed to handle device failures and data corruption robustly.Should a device go offline or experience data corruption, the FL process continues with minimal disruption, as it relies on numerous other devices that persist in their local computations.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liu, Y., Liu, P., Jing, W., & Song, H. H.
Affiliations
  • Northeast Forestry University (CN)
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore County (US)
Venue
IEEE Internet of Things Journal
Published
2023-12-15
Volume
10
Issue
24
Pages
21489-21501
ISSN
  • 2327-4662 (ISSN-L)
  • 2372-2541
OpenAlex
W4384284141
Cited by
36
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 4
FWCI
8.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Internet of Things Journal (publishedVersion)
Funders
Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province of China (LH2022F003)
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 › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › IoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Keywords
privacy-preserving data sharing, federated learning, blockchain, Internet of Things, incentive mechanisms, Stackelberg game, cross-layer architecture, scalability, privacy leakage

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