REVIEW
Sharing Models or Coresets: A Study based on Membership Inference Attack
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Sharing Models or Coresets: A Study based on Membership Inference Attack
read the original abstract
Distributed machine learning generally aims at training a global model based on distributed data without collecting all the data to a centralized location, where two different approaches have been proposed: collecting and aggregating local models (federated learning) and collecting and training over representative data summaries (coreset). While each approach preserves data privacy to some extent thanks to not sharing the raw data, the exact extent of protection is unclear under sophisticated attacks that try to infer the raw data from the shared information. We present the first comparison between the two approaches in terms of target model accuracy, communication cost, and data privacy, where the last is measured by the accuracy of a state-of-the-art attack strategy called the membership inference attack. Our experiments quantify the accuracy-privacy-cost tradeoff of each approach, and reveal a nontrivial comparison that can be used to guide the design of model training processes.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.