Privacy-Preserving, Dropout-Resilient Aggregation in Decentralized Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Decentralized learning (DL) offers a novel paradigm in machine learning by distributing training across clients without central aggregation, enhancing scalability and efficiency. However, DL's peer-to-peer model raises challenges in protecting against inference attacks and privacy leaks. By forgoing central bottlenecks, DL demands privacy-preserving aggregation methods to protect data from 'honest but curious' clients and adversaries, maintaining network-wide privacy. Privacy-preserving DL faces the additional hurdle of client dropout, clients not submitting updates due to connectivity problems or unavailability, further complicating aggregation. This work proposes three secret sharing-based dropout resilience approaches for privacy-preserving DL. Our study evaluates the efficiency, performance, and accuracy of these protocols through experiments on datasets such as MNIST, Fashion-MNIST, SVHN, and CIFAR-10. We compare our protocols with traditional secret-sharing solutions across scenarios, including those with up to 1000 clients. Evaluations show that our protocols significantly outperform conventional methods, especially in scenarios with up to 30% of clients dropout and model sizes of up to 106 parameters. Our approaches demonstrate markedly high efficiency with larger models, higher dropout rates, and extensive client networks, highlighting their effectiveness in enhancing decentralized learning systems' privacy and dropout robustness.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Apr 2024.
Builds on
18 of 44 references.
References · 18
- 2016Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Datacited by 7,669
- 2017Fashion-MNIST: a Novel Image Dataset for Benchmarking Machine Learning Algorithmscited by 4,349
- 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,281
- 2019Federated Learning: Challenges, Methods, and Future Directionscited by 1,538
- 2019Towards Federated Learning at Scale: System Designcited by 832
- 2017Can Decentralized Algorithms Outperform Centralized Algorithms? A Case Study for Decentralized Parallel Stochastic Gradient Descentcited by 502
- 2019Decentralized Stochastic Optimization and Gossip Algorithms with Compressed Communicationcited by 221
- 2021When the Curious Abandon Honesty: Federated Learning Is Not Privatecited by 127
- 2020Feature Inference Attack on Model Predictions in Vertical Federated Learningcited by 106
- 2021LightSecAgg: a Lightweight and Versatile Design for Secure Aggregation in Federated Learningcited by 64
- 2017Personalized and Private Peer-to-Peer Machine Learningcited by 54
- 2021On the (In)Feasibility of Attribute Inference Attacks on Machine Learning Modelscited by 31
6 more
- 2021Efficient Differentially Private Secure Aggregation for Federated Learning via Hardness of Learning with Errorscited by 25
- 2022On the (In)security of Peer-to-Peer Decentralized Machine Learningcited by 23
- 2020Topology-aware Differential Privacy for Decentralized Image Classificationcited by 6
- 2013On the Communication Complexity of Secure Computationcited by 4
- 2021Privacy-preserving Logistic Regression with Secret Sharingcited by 2
- 2022Privacy-preserving Decentralized Deep Learning with Multiparty Homomorphic Encryptioncited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.