# Maximizing Global Model Appeal in Federated Learning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.14840 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.14840/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 25 of its 42 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 30 May 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 25 of 25)

- [Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.05629/) (2016)
- [Fashion-MNIST: a Novel Image Dataset for Benchmarking Machine Learning Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1708.07747/) (2017)
- [Advances and Open Problems in Federated Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.04977/) (2019)
- [Federated Optimization in Heterogeneous Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.06127/) (2018)
- [On the Convergence of FedAvg on Non-IID Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.02189/) (2019)
- [Tackling the Objective Inconsistency Problem in Heterogeneous Federated Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.07481/) (2020)
- [Measuring the Effects of Non-Identical Data Distribution for Federated Visual Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.06335/) (2019)
- [Federated Multi-Task Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.10467/) (2017)
- [Ditto: Fair and Robust Federated Learning Through Personalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.04221/) (2020)
- [Personalized Federated Learning with Moreau Envelopes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.08848/) (2020)
- [Local SGD Converges Fast and Communicates Little](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.09767/) (2018)
- [Agnostic Federated Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.00146/) (2019)
- [Fair Resource Allocation in Federated Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.10497/) (2019)
- [A Field Guide to Federated Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.06917/) (2021)
- [Improving Federated Learning Personalization via Model Agnostic Meta Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.12488/) (2019)
- [EMNIST: an extension of MNIST to handwritten letters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1702.05373/) (2017)
- [SCAFFOLD: Stochastic Controlled Averaging for Federated Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.06378/) (2019)
- [Salvaging Federated Learning by Local Adaptation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.04758/) (2020)
- [Fast Federated Learning in the Presence of Arbitrary Device Unavailability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.04159/) (2021)
- [Model-sharing Games: Analyzing Federated Learning Under Voluntary Participation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.00753/) (2020)
- [Incentive Design for Efficient Federated Learning in Mobile Networks: A Contract Theory Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07479/) (2019)
- [Optimality and Stability in Federated Learning: A Game-theoretic Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.09580/) (2021)
- [One for One, or All for All: Equilibria and Optimality of Collaboration in Federated Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03228/) (2021)
- [Faithful Edge Federated Learning: Scalability and Privacy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.15905/) (2021)
- [A geometric integration approach to nonsmooth, nonconvex optimisation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1807.07554/) (2018)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [CYCle: Choosing Your Collaborators Wisely to Enhance Collaborative Fairness in Decentralized Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12344/) (2025)
- [Rethinking the Starting Point: Collaborative Pre-Training for Federated Downstream Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.02225/) (2024)
- [CoRAG: Collaborative Retrieval-Augmented Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.01883/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Federated learning typically considers collaboratively training a global model using local data at edge clients. Clients may have their own individual requirements, such as having a minimal training loss threshold, which they expect to be met by the global model. However, due to client heterogeneity, the global model may not meet each client's requirements, and only a small subset may find the global model appealing. In this work, we explore the problem of the global model lacking appeal to the clients due to not being able to satisfy local requirements. We propose MaxFL, which aims to maximize the number of clients that find the global model appealing. We show that having a high global model appeal is important to maintain an adequate pool of clients for training, and can directly improve the test accuracy on both seen and unseen clients. We provide convergence guarantees for MaxFL and show that MaxFL achieves a 22-40% and 18-50% test accuracy improvement for the training clients and unseen clients respectively, compared to a wide range of FL modeling approaches, including those that tackle data heterogeneity, aim to incentivize clients, and learn personalized or fair models.