PapersWithELO
← ICLR 2024 leaderboard

FENNs: A Resource-Efficient, Adaptive, Privacy-Preserving Decentralized Learning Framework

Paapa Kwesi Quansah, Edwin Kwesi Ansah Tenkorang, Nana Maryam Abdul-Bassit Munagah

learning theoryEphemeral Neural NetworksFederated Ephemeral Neural NetworksResource-Constrained Learning
0.30100
Fused
band ≈ ±16 pct pts (from σ = 0.32)
0.10100
Mimo
band ≈ ±23 pct pts (from σ = 0.45)
1.60100
DeepSeek
band ≈ ±23 pct pts (from σ = 0.45)

OpenReview ground truth

Rejected

TL;DR — A novel neural architecture that uses the resource constraint measurements and the task complexity to modify the seed neural architecture for a more efficient network.

Abstract

Deep neural networks have demonstrated exceptional performance in various tasks; yet, their resource-intensive nature and ongoing data privacy concerns remain key obstacles. In response, we introduce Federated Ephemeral Neural Networks (FENNs), a pioneering architecture that ingeniously addresses both challenges. FENNs rely on the concept of ephemeral neural networks (ENNs), a novel paradigm where neural networks exhibit dynamic adaptability in their architecture based on available computing resources. FENNs seamlessly blend the flexibility of ENNs with the privacy-preserving features of federated learning to tailor their structures to task complexity while ensuring data privacy within a decentralized learning environment. Rigorous tests conducted on resource-constrained devices within federated environments validate the effectiveness of FENNs. We also introduce a novel metric for evaluating the efficacy of resource-constrained learning and/or machine learning in resource-constrained environments. The proposed architecture shows significant prospects in the domains of edge computing and decentralized artificial intelligence applications.

Author context

Most prolific author: 1 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 26% of matchups.

Judge assessments

Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 32)