EFFL: Egalitarian Fairness in Federated Learning for Mitigating Matthew Effect
Jiashi Gao, Changwu Huang, Ming Tang, Shin Hwei Tan, Xin Yao, Xuetao Wei
OpenReview ground truth
Abstract
Recent advances in federated learning (FL) enable collaborative training of machine learning (ML) models from large-scale and widely dispersed clients while protecting their privacy. However, when different clients' datasets are heterogeneous, traditional FL mechanisms produce a global model that does not adequately represent the poorer clients with limited data resources, resulting in lower accuracy and higher bias on their local data. According to the Matthew effect, which describes how the advantaged gain more advantage and the disadvantaged lose more over time, deploying such a global model in client applications may worsen the resource disparity among the clients and harm the principles of social welfare and fairness. To mitigate the Matthew effect, we propose Egalitarian Fairness Federated Learning (EFFL), where egalitarian fairness refers to the global model learned from FL has: (1) equal accuracy among clients; (2) equal decision bias among clients. Besides achieving egalitarian fairness among the clients, EFFL also aims for performance optimality, minimizing the empirical risk loss and the bias for each client; both are essential for any ML model training, whether centralized or decentralized. We formulate EFFL as a multi-constrained multi-objectives optimization (MCMOO) problem, with the decision bias and egalitarian fairness as constraints and the minimization of the empirical risk losses on all clients as multiple objectives to be optimized. We propose a gradient-based three-stage algorithm to obtain the Pareto optimal solutions within the constraint space. Extensive experiments demonstrate that EFFL outperforms other state-of-the-art FL algorithms in achieving a high-performance global model with enhanced egalitarian fairness among all clients.
Author context
Most prolific author: 5 submissions (credibility 1.00).
No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).
Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.
Ranking trajectory
Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.
Battle history — 32 comparisons
Ranked above opponent in 45% of matchups.
- ▲ beat Backdoor Attack for Federated Learning wit… ×6
- ▲ beat Lightweight Unsupervised Federated Learnin… ×4
- ▼ lost to Fair Classifiers that Abstain without Harm ×4
- ▼ lost to Differentially Private Model Compression v… ×4
- ▲ beat Benchmarking Large Language Models as AI R… ×4
Judge assessments
Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 32)