arXiv:2506. 18020v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Robust distributed learning algorithms aim to maintain reliable performance despite the presence of misbehaving workers.
By Thomas Boudou, Batiste Le Bars, Nirupam Gupta, Aur\'elien Bellet
The paper introduces a general learning framework that protects privacy in federated learning by distorting model parameters, enabling a trade‑off between privacy and utility. The algorithm supports arbitrary privacy measurements and delivers personalized utility‑privacy balances for each parameter, client, and communication round. The authors prove that the gap between their algorithm’s utility loss and the optimal loss is sub‑linear in iterations, provide a convergence rate, and demonstrate empirically that their method outperforms baselines under the same privacy budget.
By Xiaojin Zhang, Wenjie Li, Yiming Li, Wei Chen, Shutao Xia, Qiang Yang
arXiv:2609.39629v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Differential privacy (DP) in machine learning is typically achieved by adding noise to model parameters (private learning) or to model outputs (private...
By Mihnea Ghitu, Matthew Wicker
arXiv:2603. 19040v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Differentially private wireless federated learning (DPWFL) is a promising framework for protecting sensitive user data.
By Chen Yaoling, Liang Hao, Tu Xiaotong
The paper introduces DP‑BR‑FedAvg, a federated learning framework that combines Gaussian‑mechanism differential privacy with a coordinate‑wise trimmed‑mean Byzantine‑robust aggregation rule. It is evaluated on a simulated cross‑institutional classification task involving fraud and clinical‑risk scoring, where it improves the F1‑score for a minority class from 0.030 (plain FedAvg) to 0.119 while bounding privacy loss. The study demonstrates that privacy and robustness mechanisms interact, and that system design for regulated, adversarial, cross‑institutional settings must account for this interaction.
By Srikumar Nayak
The paper introduces DP‑BR‑FedAvg, a federated learning framework that combines Gaussian‑mechanism differential privacy with a coordinate‑wise trimmed‑mean Byzantine‑robust aggregation rule. It is evaluated on a simulated cross‑institutional classification task for fraud and clinical‑risk scoring, showing that plain FedAvg fails when a quarter of twenty clients are Byzantine, while DP‑BR‑FedAvg recovers more signal and bounds privacy loss. The study demonstrates that privacy and robustness interact, and system design for regulated, adversarial, cross‑institutional settings must account for this interaction.