Differentially private federated learning with Byzantine-robust aggregation: A cross-domain framework for secure model training in banking and healthcare systems
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Federated learning allows banks, hospitals, and other regulated organizations to train a shared model without moving raw records off their own servers, which is attractive wherever data protection law or competitive sensitivity rules out pooling data centrally. Two problems limit how far this promise can be trusted in practice. First, the parameter updates that clients exchange still leak information about local records through gradient inversion and membership inference attacks. Second, an honest averaging rule such as FedAvg has no defense against a subset of clients that submit corrupted or adversarial updates, so a small number of malicious or compromised participants can quietly steer the shared model off course. This paper presents a federated learning framework, DP-BR-FedAvg, that combines a Gaussian-mechanism differential privacy layer with a coordinate-wise trimmed-mean Byzantine-robust aggregation rule, evaluated on a simulated cross-institutional classification task resembling fraud and clinical-risk scoring. Across sixty communication rounds with twenty clients, a quarter of them Byzantine, plain FedAvg collapses on the minority class (F1-score 0.030) while the proposed framework recovers substantially more of the signal (F1-score 0.119) while bounding the privacy loss of any single client's contribution. A Byzantine-robust aggregator with no privacy layer performs best in raw accuracy, quantifying the cost privacy imposes on robustness. The results show that privacy and robustness mechanisms interact rather than simply add, and that system design for regulated, adversarial, cross-institutional settings needs to budget for that interaction.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Sep 2026.
Builds on
14 of 21 references.
References · 14
- 2016Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Datacited by 7,669
- 2019Advances and Open Problems in Federated Learningcited by 3,046
- 2016Deep Learning with Differential Privacycited by 2,728
- 2016Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiencycited by 1,475
- 2019Deep Leakage from Gradientscited by 1,021
- 2018How To Backdoor Federated Learningcited by 765
- 2018Byzantine-Robust Distributed Learning: Towards Optimal Statistical Ratescited by 711
- 2020The Future of Digital Health with Federated Learningcited by 633
- 2017Differentially Private Federated Learning: A Client Level Perspectivecited by 459
- 2020FLTrust: Byzantine-robust Federated Learning via Trust Bootstrappingcited by 346
- 2018A Hybrid Approach to Privacy-Preserving Federated Learningcited by 210
- 2019Energy Efficient Federated Learning Over Wireless Communication Networkscited by 181
2 more
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Privacy Preserving and Robust Aggregation for Cross-Silo Federated Learning in Non-IID Settings
- 2024Secure Aggregation is Not Private Against Membership Inference Attacks
- 2026Evaluating Differential Privacy Against Membership Inference in Federated Learning: Insights from the NIST Genomics Red Team Challenge
- 2024Privacy in Federated Learning
- 2025Practical Framework for Privacy-Preserving and Byzantine-robust Federated Learning
- 2023Client-specific Property Inference against Secure Aggregation in Federated Learning
- 2022Local Differential Privacy for Federated Learning
- 2021FedCom: A Byzantine-Robust Local Model Aggregation Rule Using Data Commitment for Federated Learning