Communication-efficient federated learning for multi-institutional medical image classification
Open accessAbstract
Federated learning (FL) has emerged with increasing popularity in the medical image analysis field. In collaborative model training, it provides a privacy-preserving scheme by keeping data localized. In FL frameworks, instead of collecting data from clients, the server learns a global model by aggregating local training models from clients and broadcasts the updated model. However, in the situation where data is not identically and independently distributed (non-i.i.d), the model aggregation requires frequent message passing, which may face the communication bottleneck. In this paper, we propose a communication-efficient FL framework based on the adaptive server-client model transmission. The local model in the client will only be uploaded to the server under the conditions of (1) a probability threshold and (2) an informative model updating threshold. Our framework also tackles the data heterogeneity in federated networks by involving a proximal term. We evaluate our approach on a simulated multi-site medical image dataset for diabetic retinopathy (DR) rating. We demonstrate that our framework not only maintains the accuracy on non-i.i.d dataset but also provides a significant reduction in communication cost compared to other FL algorithms.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Zhou et al. [31] introduced a FL framework that classifies five scalability categories of DR, 0 to 4.
“In another article, Zhou et al. [31] introduced a FL framework which classifies five scalability categories of DR, 0 to 4 (No DR to Proliferative DR).”
From A systematic review on federated learning in medical image analysis (2023) · cites this paper as [31]
Zhou et al. [31] used a DR dataset consisting of 3,662 images.
“In [31], Zhou et al. used a DR dataset consisting of 3,662 images.”
From A systematic review on federated learning in medical image analysis (2023) · cites this paper as [31]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 13 · Cited by 7
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- [6]McMahan B, Moore E, Ramage D, Hampson S, and y Arcas BA, “ Communication-efficient learning of deep networks from decentralized data,” in [ Artificial intelligence and statistics], 1273– 1282, PMLR (2017).
- [8]Yurochkin M, Agarwal M, Ghosh S, Greenewald K, Hoang N, and Khazaeni Y, “ Bayesian non-parametric federated learning of neural networks,” in [ International Conference on Machine Learning], 7252– 7261, PMLR (2019).
- [9]Li Q, He B, and Song D, “ Model-contrastive federated learning,” in [ Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition], 10713– 10722 (2021).
- Authors
- Zhou, S., Landman, B., Huo, Y., & Gokhale, A.
- Affiliations
- Vanderbilt University (US)
- Venue
- Medical Imaging 2022: Imaging Informatics for Healthcare, Research, and Applications
- Publisher
- SPIE
- Published
- 2022-04-04
- Volume
- 12037
- Pages
- 2
- PMC
- PMC9605156
- OpenAlex
- W4225538689
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 13
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3
- FWCI
- 0.97
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- SPIE Medical Imaging: Imaging Informatics for Healthcare, Research, and Applications (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R01EB017230)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Stochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques
- Keywords
- non-IID data, data heterogeneity, medical image classification, diabetic retinopathy grading, multi-institutional collaboration, model aggregation, privacy preservation, proximal term
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