Cited by 617Privacy-Preserving Technologies in DataBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityAccess Control and Trust

Reliable Federated Learning for Mobile Networks

Open access
Kang, Jiawen, Xiong, Zehui, Niyato, Dusit, Zou, Yuze, Zhang, Yang, Guizani, Mohsen·2020·IEEE Wireless Communications

Abstract

Federated learning, as a promising machine learning approach, has emerged to leverage a distributed personalized dataset from a number of nodes, for example, mobile devices, to improve performance while simultaneously providing privacy preservation for mobile users. In federated learning, training data is widely distributed and maintained on the mobile devices as workers. A central aggregator updates a global model by collecting local updates from mobile devices using their local training data to train the global model in each iteration. However, unreliable data may be uploaded by the mobile devices (i.e., workers), leading to frauds in tasks of federated learning. The workers may perform unreliable updates intentionally, for example, the data poisoning attack, or unintentionally, for example, low-quality data caused by energy constraints or high-speed mobility. Therefore, finding out trusted and reliable workers in federated learning tasks becomes critical. In this article, the concept of reputation is introduced as a metric. Based on this metric, a reliable worker selection scheme is proposed for federated learning tasks. Consortium blockchain is leveraged as a decentralized approach for achieving efficient reputation management of the workers without repudiation and tampering. By numerical analysis, the proposed approach is demonstrated to improve the reliability of federated learning tasks in mobile networks.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/mwc.001.1900119

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kang, J., Xiong, Z., Niyato, D., Zou, Y., Zhang, Y., & Guizani, M.
Affiliations
  • Nanyang Technological University (SG)
  • Huazhong University of Science and Technology (CN)
  • Qatar University (QA)
Venue
IEEE Wireless Communications
Published
2020-04
Volume
27
Issue
2
Pages
72-80
ISSN
  • 1536-1284 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-0687
OpenAlex
W3006403513
Cited by
617
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 47 · 2025: 91 · 2024: 106 · 2023: 110 · 2022: 134 · 2021: 103 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 2
FWCI
36.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Wireless Communications (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DR-NTU (Nanyang Technological University) (submittedVersion)
  • Qatar University QSpace (Qatar University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (61601336)
  • Israel Science Foundation
  • Ministry of Education, India
  • Singapore University of Technology and Design (RGANS1906)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Access Control and Trust
Keywords
federated learning, worker reliability, worker selection, reputation management, consortium blockchain, data poisoning, cellular networks, privacy preservation

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