Cited by 26Privacy-Preserving Technologies in DataAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningMachine Learning and Data Classification

RobustFed: A Truth Inference Approach for Robust Federated Learning

Open access
Tahmasebian, Farnaz, Lou, Jian, Xiong, Li·2022·Proceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management

Abstract

Federated learning is a prominent framework that enables clients (e.g., mobile devices or organizations) to collaboratively train a global model under a central server's orchestration while keeping local data private. However, the aggregation step in federated learning is vulnerable to adversarial attacks as the central server cannot enforce clients' behavior. As a result, the performance of the global model and convergence of the training process can be affected under such attacks. To mitigate this vulnerability, existing works have proposed robust aggregation methods such as median based aggregation instead of averaging. While they ensure some robustness against Byzantine attacks, they are still vulnerable to label flipping and Gaussian noise attacks. In this paper, we propose a novel robust aggregation algorithm inspired by the truth inference methods in crowdsourcing by incorporating the clients' reliability into aggregation. We evaluate our solution on three real-world datasets with a variety of machine learning models. Experimental results show that our solution ensures robust federated learning and is resilient to various types of attacks, including noisy data attacks, Byzantine attacks, and label flipping attacks.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3511808.3557439

Cites

39 of 39 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
Tahmasebian, F., Lou, J., & Xiong, L.
Affiliations
  • Emory University (US)
  • Xidian University (CN)
Venue
Proceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management
Publisher
ACM
Published
2022-10-17
Pages
1868-1877
ISSN
2155-0751 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3183640384
Cited by
26
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1
FWCI
3.04
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
  • CNS-1952192
  • Mitsubishi Pharma America #BNI-ALS-005
  • CNS-2125530
  • National Institutes of Health (NIH) R01LM013712
  • Cisco Research #2738379
  • National Science Foundation (NSF) CNS-2124104
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
Keywords
robust federated learning, truth inference, robust aggregation, Byzantine attacks, label-flipping attacks, crowdsourcing, data privacy

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