Differentially Private Federated Learningfor Anomaly Detection in eHealth Networks
Abstract
Increasing number of ubiquitous devices are being used in the medical field to collect patient information. Those connected sensors can potentially be exploited by third parties who want to misuse personal information and compromise the security, which could ultimately result even in patient death. This paper addresses the security concerns in eHealth networks and suggests a new approach to dealing with anomalies. In particular we propose a concept for safe in-hospital learning from internet of health things (IoHT) device data while securing the network traffic with a collaboratively trained anomaly detection system using federated learning. That way, real time traffic anomaly detection is achieved, while maintaining collaboration between hospitals and keeping local data secure and private. Since not only the network metadata, but also the actual medical data is relevant to anomaly detection, we propose to use differential privacy (DP) for providing formal guarantees of the privacy spending accumulated during the federated learning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
An FL-based anomaly detection system using differential privacy provides privacy guarantees to data owners and uses machine learning to secure network traffic.
“An FL-based anomaly detection system is proposed that uses DP to provide privacy guarantees to data owners and uses machine learning to secure network traffic [29].”
From A Review of Privacy Enhancement Methods for Federated Learning in Healthcare Systems (2023) · cites this paper as [29]
Differential privacy provides an effective mechanism to safeguard the exchange of ML model parameters from clients to FL or edge server.
“The differential privacy approach provides an effective mechanism to safeguard the exchange of ML model parameters from clients to FL or edge server [27,28,29,31].”
From A Review of Privacy Enhancement Methods for Federated Learning in Healthcare Systems (2023) · cites this paper as [29]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 22 · Cited by 20
- Authors
- Cholakoska, A., Pfitzner, B., Gjoreski, H., Rakovic, V., Arnrich, B., & Kalendar, M.
- Affiliations
- Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Information Technologies and Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Information Technologies, Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of
- Hasso Plattner Institute (DE)
- Ss. Cyril and Methodius University in Skopje (MK)
- Hasso Plattner Institute and Hasso Plattner Institute, Germany
- Venue
- Adjunct Proceedings of the 2021 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of the 2021 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2021-09-21
- Pages
- 514-518
- OpenAlex
- W3202759115
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 22
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 1.03
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Internet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-voting
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
- Keywords
- differential privacy, federated learning, anomaly detection, Internet of Medical Things, network traffic security, medical data privacy, privacy guarantees
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