FedDRAW:联邦双声誉退火加权算法
FedDRAW: Federated Dual Reputation Annealing Weighting for Heterogeneous Multi-Institutional Chest Radiograph Classification
医疗AI新算法FedDRAW解决了联邦学习中大医院主导问题,通过双退火调度提升诊断模型公平性。
研究人员提出FedDRAW算法,用于解决医疗影像分类中的联邦学习问题。该算法在CheXpert和ChestMNIST两个胸部X光数据集上进行了测试,与7种联邦学习基线方法比较。FedDRAW在AUC和敏感性特异性几何平均(GM)指标上获得最高平均排名,经Friedman检验和Nemenyi后验分析确认方法间存在统计学显著差异。
FedDRAW: Federated Dual Reputation Annealing Weighting for Heterogeneous Multi-Institutional Chest Radiograph Classification
Artificial intelligence models are promising for medical diagnosis, but they require large numbers of unbiased data, which in medicine are distributed across hospitals and cannot be centralized to protect patient privacy. Federated Learning (FL) addresses this, since hospitals train one shared diagnostic model while patient data remain local. Training proceeds in communication rounds, in which each hospital trains the shared model locally and returns it to the server for merging by weighted average. This aggregation weight determines whose institutional knowledge shapes the result. Federated averaging (FedAvg) sets it in proportion to local sample count, so a small but informative hospital is permanently assigned a small influence, andl argest clients could dominate the global model even when they are less informative. We propose Federated Dual Reputation Annealing Weighting (FedDRAW), a server-side aggregation method that combines a data-size prior with the cosine similarity between client and global parameters under two coupled annealing schedules. An inner schedule shifts client reputation from the size prior towards similarity. An outer, deferred annealing schedule on the softmax inverse temperature keeps the weighting selective in the early and middle rounds and relaxes it to uniformity at convergence. We evaluate FedDRAW on 12 simulated client-partition scenarios of two chest radiograph datasets (CheXpert and ChestMNIST), against seven federated baselines under identical local training settings. FedDRAW achieved the highest average rank among all eight methods under both AUC and the geometric mean (GM) of sensitivity and specificity, which a Friedman test with Nemenyi post-hoc analysis confirmed to be a statistically significant difference between the methods. Scheduling two signals, rather than fixing the weights by sample count alone, could enable less biased diagnostic models.