TPFL: Tsetlin-Personalized Federated Learning with Confidence-Based Clustering

TL;DR

This paper introduces TPFL, a novel federated learning approach using Tsetlin Machines that clusters models based on confidence, reducing communication costs and improving accuracy in non-IID data scenarios.

Contribution

The paper presents TPFL, a new personalized federated learning method leveraging confidence-based clustering with Tsetlin Machines, enhancing privacy, efficiency, and accuracy.

Findings

Achieved over 98% accuracy on MNIST and FashionMNIST datasets.

Reduced communication costs by sharing only class-specific weights.

Outperformed six baseline federated learning methods.

Abstract

The world of Machine Learning (ML) has witnessed rapid changes in terms of new models and ways to process users data. The majority of work that has been done is focused on Deep Learning (DL) based approaches. However, with the emergence of new algorithms such as the Tsetlin Machine (TM) algorithm, there is growing interest in exploring alternative approaches that may offer unique advantages in certain domains or applications. One of these domains is Federated Learning (FL), in which users privacy is of utmost importance. Due to its novelty, FL has seen a surge in the incorporation of personalization techniques to enhance model accuracy while maintaining user privacy under personalized conditions. In this work, we propose a novel approach called TPFL: Tsetlin-Personalized Federated Learning, in which models are grouped into clusters based on their confidence towards a specific class. In this way, clustering can benefit from two key advantages. Firstly, clients share only what they are confident about, resulting in the elimination of wrongful weight aggregation among clients whose data for a specific class may have not been enough during the training. This phenomenon is prevalent when the data are non-Independent and Identically Distributed (non-IID). Secondly, by sharing only weights towards a specific class, communication cost is substantially reduced, making TPLF efficient in terms of both accuracy and communication cost. The TPFL results were compared with 6 other baseline methods; namely FedAvg, FedProx, FLIS DC, FLIS HC, IFCA and FedTM. The results demonstrated that TPFL performance better than baseline methods with 98.94% accuracy on MNIST, 98.52% accuracy on FashionMNIST and 91.16% accuracy on FEMNIST dataset.