Cited by 61IoT and Edge/Fog ComputingPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataInternet of Things and AI

Fog-Embedded Deep Learning for the Internet of Things

Lyu, Lingjuan, Bezdek, James C., He, Xuanli, Jin, Jiong·2019·IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics

Abstract

In current deep learning models, centralized architecture forces participants to pool their data to the central Cloud to train a global model, while distributed architecture requires a parameter server to mediate the training process. However, privacy issues, response delays, and computation and communication bottlenecks prevent these architectures from working well at the scale of Internet of Things devices. To counter these problems, in this paper we build a Fog-embedded privacy-preserving deep learning framework (FPPDL), which moves computation from the centralized Cloud to Fog nodes near the end devices. The experimental results on benchmark image datasets under different settings demonstrate that FPPDL achieves comparable accuracy to the centralized stochastic gradient descent (SGD) framework, and delivers better accuracy than the standalone SGD framework. Our evaluations also show that both computation and communication cost are greatly reduced by FPPDL, hence achieving the desired tradeoff between privacy and performance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tii.2019.2912465

Cites

31 of 31 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?

  • CAFE can recover large-scale private data from shared aggregated gradients in VFL settings, overcoming the batch limitation problem in current data leakage attacks.

    “They empirically demonstrated that CAFE can recover large-scale private data from the shared aggregated gradients in VFL settings, overcoming the batch limitation problem in current data leakage attacks.”
  • CAFE uncovered the risk of catastrophic data leakage in VFL through a novel algorithm that can perform large-batch data leakage with high data recovery quality and theoretical guarantees.

    “Another recent work [182] uncovered the risk of catastrophic data leakage in vertical federated learning (CAFE) through a novel algorithm that can perform largebatch data leakage with high data recovery quality and theoretical guarantees.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lyu, L., Bezdek, J. C., He, X., & Jin, J.
Affiliations
  • Australian National University (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • Monash University (AU)
  • Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics
Published
2019-07
Volume
15
Issue
7
Pages
4206-4215
ISSN
  • 1551-3203 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-0050
OpenAlex
W2941227905
Cited by
61
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 3
FWCI
5.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics (publishedVersion)
  • Swinburne figshare (Swinburne University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › IoT and Edge/Fog Computing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Internet of Things and AI
Keywords
fog computing, privacy-preserving deep learning, Internet of Things, distributed deep learning, federated learning, computation-communication trade-off, edge computing, image classification, computation cost reduction, communication cost reduction

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