TPFL: Tsetlin-Personalized Federated Learning with Confidence-Based Clustering
The world of Machine Learning (ML) has witnessed rapid changes in terms of new models and ways to process users data. The majority of work that has been done is focused on Deep Learning (DL) based approaches. However, with the emergence of new algorithms such as the Tsetlin Machine (TM) algorithm, t...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The world of Machine Learning (ML) has witnessed rapid changes in terms of
new models and ways to process users data. The majority of work that has been
done is focused on Deep Learning (DL) based approaches. However, with the
emergence of new algorithms such as the Tsetlin Machine (TM) algorithm, there
is growing interest in exploring alternative approaches that may offer unique
advantages in certain domains or applications. One of these domains is
Federated Learning (FL), in which users privacy is of utmost importance. Due to
its novelty, FL has seen a surge in the incorporation of personalization
techniques to enhance model accuracy while maintaining user privacy under
personalized conditions. In this work, we propose a novel approach called TPFL:
Tsetlin-Personalized Federated Learning, in which models are grouped into
clusters based on their confidence towards a specific class. In this way,
clustering can benefit from two key advantages. Firstly, clients share only
what they are confident about, resulting in the elimination of wrongful weight
aggregation among clients whose data for a specific class may have not been
enough during the training. This phenomenon is prevalent when the data are
non-Independent and Identically Distributed (non-IID). Secondly, by sharing
only weights towards a specific class, communication cost is substantially
reduced, making TPLF efficient in terms of both accuracy and communication
cost. The TPFL results were compared with 6 other baseline methods; namely
FedAvg, FedProx, FLIS DC, FLIS HC, IFCA and FedTM. The results demonstrated
that TPFL performance better than baseline methods with 98.94% accuracy on
MNIST, 98.52% accuracy on FashionMNIST and 91.16% accuracy on FEMNIST dataset. |
---|---|
DOI: | 10.48550/arxiv.2409.10392 |