# Utilizing Free Clients in Federated Learning for Focused Model Enhancement

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.04515 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.04515/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 26 of its 34 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 6 Oct 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 26 of 26)

- [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)
- [Adaptive Federated Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.00295/) (2020)
- [Tackling the Objective Inconsistency Problem in Heterogeneous Federated Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.07481/) (2020)
- [Federated Multi-Task Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.10467/) (2017)
- [Local SGD Converges Fast and Communicates Little](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.09767/) (2018)
- [Federated Learning for Mobile Keyboard Prediction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.03604/) (2018)
- [Clustered Federated Learning: Model-Agnostic Distributed Multi-Task Optimization under Privacy Constraints](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.01991/) (2019)
- [Towards Personalized Federated Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.00710/) (2021)
- [A Unified Theory of Decentralized SGD with Changing Topology and Local Updates](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.10422/) (2020)
- [Client Selection for Federated Learning with Heterogeneous Resources in Mobile Edge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.08333/) (2018)
- [Client Selection in Federated Learning: Convergence Analysis and Power-of-Choice Selection Strategies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.01243/) (2020)
- [On the Convergence of Local Descent Methods in Federated Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.14425/) (2019)
- [Is Local SGD Better than Minibatch SGD?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.07839/) (2020)
- [FedPD: A Federated Learning Framework with Optimal Rates and Adaptivity to Non-IID Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11418/) (2020)
- [Optimal Client Sampling for Federated Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.13723/) (2020)
- [FedSplit: An algorithmic framework for fast federated optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.05238/) (2020)
- [TiFL: A Tier-based Federated Learning System](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.09249/) (2020)
- [Client Selection in Federated Learning: Principles, Challenges, and Opportunities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.01549/) (2022)
- [Fast-Convergent Federated Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.13137/) (2020)
- [Federated learning with class imbalance reduction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.11266/) (2020)
- [Linear Speedup in Personalized Collaborative Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.05968/) (2021)
- [Federated Asymptotics: a model to compare federated learning algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07313/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Federated Learning (FL) is a distributed machine learning approach to learn models on decentralized heterogeneous data, without the need for clients to share their data. Many existing FL approaches assume that all clients have equal importance and construct a global objective based on all clients. We consider a version of FL we call Prioritized FL, where the goal is to learn a weighted mean objective of a subset of clients, designated as priority clients. An important question arises: How do we choose and incentivize well aligned non priority clients to participate in the federation, while discarding misaligned clients? We present FedALIGN (Federated Adaptive Learning with Inclusion of Global Needs) to address this challenge. The algorithm employs a matching strategy that chooses non priority clients based on how similar the models loss is on their data compared to the global data, thereby ensuring the use of non priority client gradients only when it is beneficial for priority clients. This approach ensures mutual benefits as non priority clients are motivated to join when the model performs satisfactorily on their data, and priority clients can utilize their updates and computational resources when their goals align. We present a convergence analysis that quantifies the trade off between client selection and speed of convergence. Our algorithm shows faster convergence and higher test accuracy than baselines for various synthetic and benchmark datasets.