Cited by 291Privacy-Preserving Technologies in DataBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning

A Secure Federated Learning Framework for 5G Networks

Open access
Liu, Yi, Peng, Jialiang, Kang, Jiawen, Iliyasu, Abdullah M., Niyato, Dusit, El-Latif, Ahmed A. Abd·2020·IEEE Wireless Communications

Abstract

Federated learning (FL) has recently been proposed as an emerging paradigm to build machine learning models using distributed training datasets that are locally stored and maintained on different devices in 5G networks while providing privacy preservation for participants. In FL, the central aggregator accumulates local updates uploaded by participants to update a global model. However, there are two critical security threats: poisoning and membership inference attacks. These attacks may be carried out by malicious or unreliable participants, resulting in the construction failure of global models or privacy leakage of FL models. Therefore, it is crucial for FL to develop security means of defense. In this article, we propose a blockchain-based secure FL framework to create smart contracts and prevent malicious or unreliable participants from being involved in FL. In doing so, the central aggregator recognizes malicious and unreliable participants by automatically executing smart contracts to defend against poisoning attacks. Further, we use local differential privacy techniques to prevent membership inference attacks. Numerical results suggest that the proposed framework can effectively deter poisoning and membership inference attacks, thereby improving the security of FL in 5G networks.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/mwc.01.1900525

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liu, Y., Peng, J., Kang, J., Iliyasu, A. M., Niyato, D., & El-Latif, A. A. A.
Affiliations
  • Heilongjiang University (CN)
  • Nanyang Technological University (SG)
  • Changchun University of Science and Technology (CN)
Venue
IEEE Wireless Communications
Published
2020-08
Volume
27
Issue
4
Pages
24-31
ISSN
  • 1536-1284 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-0687
OpenAlex
W3025412407
Cited by
290
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 67 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 4
FWCI
17.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Wireless Communications (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
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 › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Keywords
federated learning, 5G, blockchain, smart contracts, poisoning attacks, membership inference attacks, differential privacy, 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