Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 56 references

Principles and Components of Federated Learning Architectures

T0 review · 4 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper organizes federated learning architecture into five design domains and derives reusable architectural patterns from a systematic survey of the literature.

desk verdict A thin overview of FL that claims a pattern language and a systematic survey but delivers neither, and cites a nonexistent Algorithm 4 as its algorithmic authority. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.05273 v2 pith:2VTRJN5V submitted 2025-02-07 cs.LG

MD Abdullah Al Nasim , Fatema Tuj Johura Soshi , Parag Biswas , A.S.M Anas Ferdous , Abdur Rashid , Angona Biswas , Kishor Datta Gupta This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.LG
keywords FederatedLearningArchitecturesSystemHeterogeneityDataPartitioningPrivacyTechniquesCommunicationProtocolsArchitecturalPatterns
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper is a survey that tries to establish a workable organizing view of federated learning (FL) architecture, the setting in which multiple clients train a shared model without sharing raw data. Its central claim is that any FL system can be understood through five design domains - system heterogeneity, data partitioning, machine learning models, communication protocols, and privacy techniques - and that the literature supports a catalogue of reusable architectural patterns. The authors intend this synthesis to help researchers and practitioners choose structures for FL deployments, particularly in privacy-sensitive fields like healthcare and finance. A sympathetic reader would take the paper as claiming that its taxonomy and pattern list are an accurate, systematic distillation of the surveyed work.

What carries the argument

The organizing mechanism is a two-part taxonomy. The first part decomposes every FL system into five domains: system heterogeneity, data partitioning, machine learning models, communication protocols, and privacy techniques. The second part is a catalogue of architectural patterns - reusable configuration choices such as centralized aggregation, peer-to-peer exchange, hierarchical aggregation, asynchronous updates, and the horizontal, vertical, and transfer split of data. Named frameworks like PERFIT, MMVLF, FADL, Blockchain-FL, and FEDF serve as concrete instances of these patterns. The taxonomy does the work of the argument: by placing each surveyed architecture into the five domains, the paper makes the case that FL's design space is finite and navigable.

What would settle it

Inspect the cited performance evaluation [34] and the CO-OP source [35] side by side with Section 4 of this paper. If the weighting rule attributed to FedAvg, the single-iteration description of FSVRG, or the age-gap merging rule for CO-OP does not match the sources, the survey's algorithmic account is unsupported. In addition, locating 'Algorithm 4' - which the text repeatedly cites but never displays - is a necessary check: absent that pseudocode, the central algorithmic claims cannot be verified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The article's central claim is that federated learning architecture is not a single design but a space of choices, and that the existing literature can be organized into a coherent map. It distinguishes horizontal federated learning (same features, different samples), vertical federated learning (same samples, different features), and federated transfer learning (different samples and features), and it separates topologies into centralized, decentralized, hierarchical, and asynchronous forms. It also catalogs specialized frameworks such as PERFIT, MMVLF, FADL, Blockchain-FL, and FEDF. On algorithms, it follows a cited performance study in presenting Federated Averaging (FedAvg) as the strongest baseline, with FSVRG and CO-OP as variance-reduced and asynchronous alternatives. The paper's contribution is the synthesis itself: the five-domain decomposition plus the pattern catalogue, offered as a tool for understanding and building FL systems.

Load-bearing premise

The survey's usefulness depends on its claim that the five-domain decomposition and the pattern catalogue faithfully represent the cited literature, and in the algorithm section that fidelity cannot be checked because the pseudocode labeled 'Algorithm 4' is referenced but never appears in the paper.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • System builders can use the five domains as a design checklist, since the survey presents each domain as a set of options that must be chosen before training begins.
  • The pattern catalogue gives practitioners a starting topology - centralized, decentralized, hierarchical, or asynchronous - based on whether the main constraint is a central bottleneck, latency, or stragglers.
  • In regulated sectors, the surveyed privacy techniques (differential privacy, homomorphic encryption, secure multi-party computation) are presented as ways to comply with data-protection law without moving raw data.
  • The algorithmic summary supports treating Federated Averaging as a default baseline in i.i.d. settings, with variance-reduced and asynchronous methods as alternatives when those assumptions fail.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct test of the survey's accuracy would be to reconstruct the missing 'Algorithm 4' from the cited sources and check whether the prose descriptions of FedAvg, FSVRG, and CO-OP match it; until then, the algorithm section should be read as an unverified summary.
  • The five-domain taxonomy could be converted into a decision procedure that maps deployment constraints to a recommended architecture, which would make the organizing claim practically falsifiable.
  • If the taxonomy is right, it likely extends to settings the paper does not develop, such as federated fine-tuning of large language models, where communication cost and privacy interact more sharply than in the surveyed use cases.
  • The zero-trust discussion suggests a testable convergence: if federated training can learn trust scores from behavior, those scores could be used to filter poisoned updates, connecting the privacy and security domains of the taxonomy.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper is a survey-style manuscript on federated learning (FL) architectures. It introduces basic FL concepts and claims to address five key domains (system heterogeneity, data partitioning, ML models, communication protocols, privacy techniques), summarizes three FL algorithms (FedAvg, FSVRG, CO-OP), lists several FL architecture categories in a table, and states in the abstract that it provides a set of architectural patterns derived from a systematic literature survey. The conclusion additionally claims that the paper presents architectural principles.

Significance. If the claimed architectural patterns and the systematic survey were actually present, the paper could serve as a useful organizing resource for practitioners seeking an overview of FL architecture. The bibliography draws on relevant and sometimes authoritative prior work. However, the manuscript currently provides none of the promised artifacts: no pattern catalogue, no enumerated architectural principles, no survey methodology, and no inspectable algorithm pseudocode. Because these gaps affect the paper's primary stated contributions, the paper as submitted is not a reliable reference and its findings cannot be verified or reproduced.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4] Section 4 repeatedly invokes 'Algorithm 4' as the authoritative pseudocode for FedAvg, FSVRG, and CO-OP, including the statements 'as stated in Algorithm 4 on line 7', 'Algorithm 4 thoroughly explains FSVRG', and 'We see the CO-OP pseudocode in Algorithm 4'; however, no Algorithm 4, code listing, or pseudocode block appears anywhere in the manuscript, so the algorithmic details that this section depends on cannot be checked.
  2. [Abstract and Section 5] The abstract promises 'a set of architectural patterns for federated learning systems, which are derived from the systematic survey of the literature,' but the manuscript never defines a single architectural pattern in the sense of a recurring problem, context, and reusable solution; Table 1 merely lists architecture categories with short synopses, and Section 8's assertion that 'We also present architectural principles' is not supported by any enumerated principles in the body of the paper.
  3. [Methodology (absent)] No methodology for the claimed systematic survey is described anywhere in the paper: there is no search strategy, list of databases, inclusion or exclusion criteria, or synthesis procedure, so the derivation claim in the abstract is unverifiable and should either be substantiated with a methodology section or removed.
  4. [Section 4] Despite its heading, 'Evaluation Of The Performance Of Federated Learning Algorithms,' Section 4 only paraphrases the experimental study of reference [34]; it presents no evaluation results, metrics, or analysis of its own beyond mentioning the MNIST dataset, and the claim that FedAvg 'proves to be the most successful' is therefore not supported by evidence provided in this manuscript.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Throughout] The text contains several typographical errors, including 'F ederated' in the Section 2.2.1 heading, 'T able' before Table 1, and inconsistent capitalization of 'PERFIT' versus 'PerFit'; these should be corrected.
  2. [Section 5] The figure references are out of order: the text refers to 'Fig. 9' before introducing 'Figure 8', and the ordering of the discussion does not match the figure numbering; the figures and cross-references should be renumbered and fixed.
  3. [References] Reference [35] is incomplete because it lacks venue or identifier information (it appears to be an unpublished manuscript), and references [4], [5], and [44] contain literal '???' placeholders for publisher locations; these bibliographic entries need to be completed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: this is a literature survey; the unfulfilled 'pattern derivation' claim and missing Algorithm 4 are unsupported exposition, not definitional self-reference.

full rationale

The paper does not derive predictions from fitted parameters, does not define its objects in terms of its conclusions, and does not rely on a self-cited uniqueness theorem. Its central content is a summary of external federated learning concepts (Sections 2, 5) and of three algorithms taken from [34] (Section 4). The abstract promises 'a set of architectural patterns for federated learning systems, which are derived from the systematic survey of the literature,' but the manuscript never enumerates such patterns or describes the survey methodology; the conclusion likewise states 'We also present architectural principles' without listing them. This is a failure to deliver an asserted contribution, and the evaluation section is unverifiable because 'Algorithm 4' is repeatedly invoked ('as stated in Algorithm 4 on line 7', 'Algorithm 4 thoroughly explains FSVRG', 'We see the CO-OP pseudocode in Algorithm 4') yet never appears in the paper. Missing support and unverifiable references are correctness/rigor defects, not circularity: nothing in the paper reduces, by construction or by definition, to its own inputs. The only self-citations ([2]-[5], by co-authors Biswas and Al Nasim) appear as background examples in the introduction and do not carry any load in the survey's claims. No circular step can be exhibited under the hard rules, so the honest finding is a score of 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities appear because the paper is a review. The two axioms listed are the load-bearing premises for trusting the review's accuracy: that the cited papers are represented faithfully and that the asserted systematic survey process actually took place.

assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption The cited sources accurately describe the FL architectures and algorithms.
    The survey's entire content is a summary of cited papers (e.g., [13], [34], [39]); if any summary is inaccurate, the review inherits the error. No independent verification is provided.
  • ad hoc to paper The 'systematic survey' methodology exists and is sound.
    The abstract claims the architectural patterns are derived from a systematic survey, but no methodology is described; the claim rests on an undisclosed process.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Principles and Components of Federated Learning Architectures." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2VTRJN5V

@misc{pith2026250205273,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Principles and Components of Federated Learning Architectures},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2VTRJN5V}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05273}
}
read the original abstract

Federated Learning (FL) is a machine learning framework where multiple clients, from mobiles to enterprises, collaboratively construct a model under the orchestration of a central server but still retain the decentralized nature of the training data. This decentralized training of models offers numerous advantages, including cost savings, enhanced privacy, improved security, and compliance with legal requirements. However, for all its apparent advantages, FL is not immune to the limitations of conventional machine learning methodologies. This article provides an elaborate explanation of the inherent concepts and features found within federated learning architecture, addressing five key domains: system heterogeneity, data partitioning, machine learning models, communication protocols, and privacy techniques. This article also highlights the limitations in this domain and proposes avenues for future work. Besides, we provide a set of architectural patterns for federated learning systems, which are derived from the systematic survey of the literature. The main elements of FL, the fundamentals of Federated Learning, and a few architectural specifics will all be better understood with the aid of this research.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [13]

    Journal of Systems and Software 191, 111357 (2022)

    Lo, S.K., Lu, Q., Zhu, L., Paik, H.-Y., Xu, X., Wang, C.: Architectural patterns for the design of federated learning systems. Journal of Systems and Software 191, 111357 (2022)

    work page 2022

  2. [39]

    IEEE Access8, 140699–140725 (2020)

    Aledhari, M., Razzak, R., Parizi, R.M., Saeed, F.: Federated learning: A survey on enabling technologies, protocols, and applications. IEEE Access8, 140699–140725 (2020)

    work page 2020

  3. [44]

    In: Federated Learning for IoT Applications, pp

    Singh, P., Singh, M.K., Singh, R., Singh, N.: Federated learning: Challenges, methods, and future directions. In: Federated Learning for IoT Applications, pp. 199–214. Springer, ??? (2022)

    work page 2022

  4. [49]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.11154 (2020)

    Feng, S., Yu, H.: Multi-participant multi-class vertical federated learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.11154 (2020)

    arXiv 2020

  5. [34]

    In: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Distributed Infrastructures for Deep Learning, pp

    Nilsson, A., Smith, S., Ulm, G., Gustavsson, E., Jirstrand, M.: A perfor- mance evaluation of federated learning algorithms. In: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Distributed Infrastructures for Deep Learning, pp. 1–8 (2018)

    work page 2018

  6. [1]

    Expert systems with applications 165, 113816 (2021)

    Badue, C., Guidolini, R., Carneiro, R.V., Azevedo, P., Cardoso, V.B., Forechi, A., Jesus, L., Berriel, R., Paixao, T.M., Mutz, F., et al.: Self-driving cars: A survey. Expert systems with applications 165, 113816 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [2]

    In: 2021 2nd International Conference on Robotics, Electrical and Signal Processing Techniques (ICREST), pp

    Biswas, A., Islam, M.S.: Brain tumor types classification using k-means clustering and ann approach. In: 2021 2nd International Conference on Robotics, Electrical and Signal Processing Techniques (ICREST), pp. 654–658 (2021). IEEE

    work page 2021

  8. [3]

    Journal of Information Systems Engineering & Business Intelligence 9(1) (2023) 21

    Biswas, A., Islam, M.S.: A hybrid deep cnn-svm approach for brain tumor clas- sification. Journal of Information Systems Engineering & Business Intelligence 9(1) (2023) 21

    work page 2023

Show all 56 references
  1. [4]

    In: Data Driven Approaches on Medical Imaging, pp

    Biswas, A., Abdullah Al, N.M., Ali, M.S., Hossain, I., Ullah, M.A., Talukder, S.: Active learning on medical image. In: Data Driven Approaches on Medical Imaging, pp. 51–67. Springer, ??? (2023)

    2023

  2. [5]

    In: Data Driven Approaches on Medical Imaging, pp

    Biswas, A., Md Abdullah Al, N., Imran, A., Sejuty, A.T., Fairooz, F., Puppala, S., Talukder, S.: Generative adversarial networks for data augmentation. In: Data Driven Approaches on Medical Imaging, pp. 159–177. Springer, ??? (2023)

    2023

  3. [6]

    ICT Express (2024)

    Idris, M.Y.I., Ahmedy, I., Soon, T.K., Yahuza, M., Tambuwal, A.B., Ali, U.: Cognitive radio and machine learning modalities for enhancing the smart transportation system: A systematic literature review. ICT Express (2024)

    2024

  4. [7]

    International Journal of Intelligent Networks 4, 145–154 (2023)

    Prabadevi, B., Shalini, R., Kavitha, B.: Customer churning analysis using machine learning algorithms. International Journal of Intelligent Networks 4, 145–154 (2023)

    2023

  5. [8]

    InfoMat 5(1), 12360 (2023)

    Yang, Y., Shi, Q., Zhang, Z., Shan, X., Salam, B., Lee, C.: Robust triboelec- tric information-mat enhanced by multi-modality deep learning for smart home. InfoMat 5(1), 12360 (2023)

    2023

  6. [9]

    Diagnostics 13(19), 3113 (2023)

    Khalid, A., Mehmood, A., Alabrah, A., Alkhamees, B.F., Amin, F., AlSalman, H., Choi, G.S.: Breast cancer detection and prevention using machine learning. Diagnostics 13(19), 3113 (2023)

    2023

  7. [10]

    Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)-Reviews on Cancer 1878(2), 188864 (2023)

    Zhao, X., Bai, J.-W., Guo, Q., Ren, K., Zhang, G.-J.: Clinical applications of deep learning in breast mri. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)-Reviews on Cancer 1878(2), 188864 (2023)

    2023

  8. [11]

    IEEE Communications Magazine 59(2), 16–21 (2021)

    Savazzi, S., Nicoli, M., Bennis, M., Kianoush, S., Barbieri, L.: Opportunities of federated learning in connected, cooperative, and automated industrial systems. IEEE Communications Magazine 59(2), 16–21 (2021)

    2021

  9. [12]

    Future Generation Computer Systems 115, 619–640 (2021)

    Mothukuri, V., Parizi, R.M., Pouriyeh, S., Huang, Y., Dehghantanha, A., Sri- vastava, G.: A survey on security and privacy of federated learning. Future Generation Computer Systems 115, 619–640 (2021)

    2021

  10. [14]

    IEEE Internet of Things Journal 6(3), 4118–4149 (2018)

    Omoniwa, B., Hussain, R., Javed, M.A., Bouk, S.H., Malik, S.A.: Fog/edge computing-based iot (feciot): Architecture, applications, and research issues. IEEE Internet of Things Journal 6(3), 4118–4149 (2018)

    2018

  11. [15]

    Informatics in medicine unlocked 22 20, 100378 (2020)

    Imran, A., Posokhova, I., Qureshi, H.N., Masood, U., Riaz, M.S., Ali, K., John, C.N., Hussain, M.I., Nabeel, M.: Ai4covid-19: Ai enabled preliminary diagnosis for covid-19 from cough samples via an app. Informatics in medicine unlocked 22 20, 100378 (2020)

    2020

  12. [16]

    Journal of web engineering 21(1), 53–74 (2022)

    Rentero-Trejo, R., Flores-Mart ´ ın, D., Gal´ an-Jim´ enez, J., Garc ´ ıa-Alonso, J., Murillo, J.M., Berrocal, J.: Using federated learning to achieve proactive context- aware iot environments. Journal of web engineering 21(1), 53–74 (2022)

    2022

  13. [17]

    CSI Transactions on ICT 10(1), 47–60 (2022)

    Chalamala, S.R., Kummari, N.K., Singh, A.K., Saibewar, A., Chalavadi, K.M.: Federated learning to comply with data protection regulations. CSI Transactions on ICT 10(1), 47–60 (2022)

    2022

  14. [18]

    IEEE Communications Letters 26(1), 3–7 (2021)

    Bouzinis, P.S., Diamantoulakis, P.D., Karagiannidis, G.K.: Wireless federated learning (wfl) for 6g networks4part i: Research challenges and future trends. IEEE Communications Letters 26(1), 3–7 (2021)

    2021

  15. [19]

    Computer Communications 195, 346–361 (2022)

    Agrawal, S., Sarkar, S., Aouedi, O., Yenduri, G., Piamrat, K., Alazab, M., Bhattacharya, S., Maddikunta, P.K.R., Gadekallu, T.R.: Federated learning for intrusion detection system: Concepts, challenges and future directions. Computer Communications 195, 346–361 (2022)

    2022

  16. [20]

    IEEE Internet of Things Journal8(16), 12806–12825 (2021)

    Nguyen, D.C., Ding, M., Pham, Q.-V., Pathirana, P.N., Le, L.B., Seneviratne, A., Li, J., Niyato, D., Poor, H.V.: Federated learning meets blockchain in edge computing: Opportunities and challenges. IEEE Internet of Things Journal8(16), 12806–12825 (2021)

    2021

  17. [21]

    IEEE Access 9, 63229–63249 (2021)

    Bouacida, N., Mohapatra, P.: Vulnerabilities in federated learning. IEEE Access 9, 63229–63249 (2021)

    2021

  18. [22]

    NPJ digital medicine 3(1), 1–7 (2020)

    Rieke, N., Hancox, J., Li, W., Milletari, F., Roth, H.R., Albarqouni, S., Bakas, S., Galtier, M.N., Landman, B.A., Maier-Hein, K., et al.: The future of digital health with federated learning. NPJ digital medicine 3(1), 1–7 (2020)

    2020

  19. [23]

    IEEE Communications Magazine 58(6), 46–51 (2020)

    Niknam, S., Dhillon, H.S., Reed, J.H.: Federated learning for wireless com- munications: Motivation, opportunities, and challenges. IEEE Communications Magazine 58(6), 46–51 (2020)

    2020

  20. [24]

    IEEE Internet of Things Journal (2023)

    Gao, D., Wang, H., Guo, X., Wang, L., Gui, G., Wang, W., Yin, Z., Wang, S., Liu, Y., He, T.: Federated learning based on ctc for heterogeneous internet of things. IEEE Internet of Things Journal (2023)

    2023

  21. [25]

    Wireless communications and mobile computing 2023 (2023)

    Gebremariam, G.G., Panda, J., Indu, S., et al.: Blockchain-based secure localiza- tion against malicious nodes in iot-based wireless sensor networks using federated learning. Wireless communications and mobile computing 2023 (2023)

    2023

  22. [26]

    Computer Networks, 110358 (2024) 23

    Kazmi, S.H.A., Qamar, F., Hassan, R., Nisar, K., Al-Betar, M.A.: Security of federated learning in 6g era: A review on conceptual techniques and software platforms used for research and analysis. Computer Networks, 110358 (2024) 23

    2024

  23. [27]

    Information Processing & Management 60(1), 103150 (2023)

    Chahoud, M., Otoum, S., Mourad, A.: On the feasibility of federated learning towards on-demand client deployment at the edge. Information Processing & Management 60(1), 103150 (2023)

    2023

  24. [28]

    IEEE Internet of Things Journal 7(6), 5171–5183 (2020)

    Qu, Y., Gao, L., Luan, T.H., Xiang, Y., Yu, S., Li, B., Zheng, G.: Decentral- ized privacy using blockchain-enabled federated learning in fog computing. IEEE Internet of Things Journal 7(6), 5171–5183 (2020)

    2020

  25. [29]

    IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems (2023)

    Han, S., Ding, H., Zhao, S., Ren, S., Wang, Z., Lin, J., Zhou, S.: Practical and robust federated learning with highly scalable regression training. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems (2023)

    2023

  26. [30]

    IEEE Communications Magazine60(7), 60–66 (2022)

    Mills, J., Hu, J., Min, G.: Client-side optimization strategies for communication- efficient federated learning. IEEE Communications Magazine60(7), 60–66 (2022)

    2022

  27. [31]

    Available at SSRN 4331547 (2022)

    Guembe, B., Azeta, A., Osamor, V., Ekpo, R.: Explainable artificial intelligence, the fourth pillar of zero trust security. Available at SSRN 4331547 (2022)

    2022

  28. [32]

    IEEE Access (2024)

    Gummadi, A.N., Napier, J.C., Abdallah, M.: Xai-iot: an explainable ai framework for enhancing anomaly detection in iot systems. IEEE Access (2024)

    2024

  29. [33]

    IEEE Wireless Communications 31(2), 30–35 (2024)

    Hussain, M., Pal, S., Jadidi, Z., Foo, E., Kanhere, S.: Federated zero trust archi- tecture using artificial intelligence. IEEE Wireless Communications 31(2), 30–35 (2024)

    2024

  30. [35]

    Wang, Y.: Co-op: Cooperative machine learning from mobile devices (2017)

    2017

  31. [36]

    ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST) 13(4), 1–23 (2022)

    Antunes, R.S., Costa, C., K¨ uderle, A., Yari, I.A., Eskofier, B.: Federated learning for healthcare: Systematic review and architecture proposal. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST) 13(4), 1–23 (2022)

    2022

  32. [37]

    Complex & Intelligent Systems7(2), 639–657 (2021)

    Zhu, H., Zhang, H., Jin, Y.: From federated learning to federated neural architecture search: a survey. Complex & Intelligent Systems7(2), 639–657 (2021)

    2021

  33. [38]

    ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 54(6), 1–36 (2021)

    Yin, X., Zhu, Y., Hu, J.: A comprehensive survey of privacy-preserving federated learning: A taxonomy, review, and future directions. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 54(6), 1–36 (2021)

    2021

  34. [40]

    Artificial intelligence review 54(1), 215–251 (2021) 24

    Ben Yedder, H., Cardoen, B., Hamarneh, G.: Deep learning for biomedical image reconstruction: A survey. Artificial intelligence review 54(1), 215–251 (2021) 24

    2021

  35. [41]

    In: 2019 IEEE 20th International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration for Data Science (IRI), pp

    Doku, R., Rawat, D.B., Liu, C.: Towards federated learning approach to deter- mine data relevance in big data. In: 2019 IEEE 20th International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration for Data Science (IRI), pp. 184–192 (2019). IEEE

    2019

  36. [42]

    In: 2008 IEEE International Conference on Automation, Quality and Testing, Robotics, vol

    Stoian, A., Ivan, R., Stoian, I., Marichescu, A.: Current trends in medical imag- ing acquisition and communication. In: 2008 IEEE International Conference on Automation, Quality and Testing, Robotics, vol. 3, pp. 94–99 (2008). IEEE

    2008

  37. [43]

    International journal of medical informatics 112, 59–67 (2018)

    Brisimi, T.S., Chen, R., Mela, T., Olshevsky, A., Paschalidis, I.C., Shi, W.: Fed- erated learning of predictive models from federated electronic health records. International journal of medical informatics 112, 59–67 (2018)

    2018

  38. [45]

    Proceedings of machine learning and systems 1, 374–388 (2019)

    Bonawitz, K., Eichner, H., Grieskamp, W., Huba, D., Ingerman, A., Ivanov, V., Kiddon, C., Koneˇ cn` y, J., Mazzocchi, S., McMahan, B.,et al.: Towards federated learning at scale: System design. Proceedings of machine learning and systems 1, 374–388 (2019)

    2019

  39. [46]

    IEEE Intelligent Systems 36(6), 87–98 (2021)

    Cheng, K., Fan, T., Jin, Y., Liu, Y., Chen, T., Papadopoulos, D., Yang, Q.: Secureboost: A lossless federated learning framework. IEEE Intelligent Systems 36(6), 87–98 (2021)

    2021

  40. [47]

    ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST) 10(2), 1–19 (2019)

    Yang, Q., Liu, Y., Chen, T., Tong, Y.: Federated machine learning: Concept and applications. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST) 10(2), 1–19 (2019)

    2019

  41. [48]

    IEEE Intelligent Systems 35(4), 70–82 (2020)

    Liu, Y., Kang, Y., Xing, C., Chen, T., Yang, Q.: A secure federated transfer learning framework. IEEE Intelligent Systems 35(4), 70–82 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

    Intelligent Systems with Applications 14, 200064 (2022)

    Imteaj, A., Amini, M.H.: Leveraging asynchronous federated learning to predict customers financial distress. Intelligent Systems with Applications 14, 200064 (2022)

    2022

  43. [51]

    IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials 23(3), 1759–1799 (2021)

    Khan, L.U., Saad, W., Han, Z., Hossain, E., Hong, C.S.: Federated learning for internet of things: Recent advances, taxonomy, and open challenges. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials 23(3), 1759–1799 (2021)

    2021

  44. [52]

    IEEE Internet of Things Magazine 5(1), 24–29 (2022) 25

    Zhang, T., Gao, L., He, C., Zhang, M., Krishnamachari, B., Avestimehr, A.S.: Federated learning for the internet of things: Applications, challenges, and opportunities. IEEE Internet of Things Magazine 5(1), 24–29 (2022) 25

    2022

  45. [53]

    Future Generation Computer Systems 129, 380–388 (2022)

    Singh, S., Rathore, S., Alfarraj, O., Tolba, A., Yoon, B.: A framework for privacy- preservation of iot healthcare data using federated learning and blockchain technology. Future Generation Computer Systems 129, 380–388 (2022)

    2022

  46. [54]

    IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics 27(2), 778–789 (2022)

    Ali, M., Naeem, F., Tariq, M., Kaddoum, G.: Federated learning for privacy preservation in smart healthcare systems: A comprehensive survey. IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics 27(2), 778–789 (2022)

    2022

  47. [55]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.10026 (2024)

    Zhou, L., Wang, M., Zhou, N.: Distributed federated learning-based deep learning model for privacy mri brain tumor detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.10026 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  48. [56]

    International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics 14(8), 2659–2670 (2023) 26

    Makkar, A., Santosh, K.: Securefed: federated learning empowered medical imag- ing technique to analyze lung abnormalities in chest x-rays. International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics 14(8), 2659–2670 (2023) 26

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.