Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2502.03231

The Other Side of the Coin: Unveiling the Downsides of Model Aggregation in Federated Learning from a Layer-peeled Perspective

Guogang Zhu·Xuefeng Liu·Jianwei Niu·Shaojie Tang·Xinghao Wu
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

It is often observed that the aggregated model in FL underperforms on local data until after several rounds of local training. This temporary performance drop can potentially slow down the convergence of the FL model. Prior work regards this performance drop as an inherent cost of knowledge sharing among clients and does not give it special attention. While some studies directly focus on designing techniques to alleviate the issue, its root causes remain poorly understood. To bridge this gap, we construct a framework that enables layer-peeled analysis of how feature representations evolve during model aggregation in FL. It focuses on two key aspects: (1) the intrinsic quality of extracted features, and (2) the alignment between features and their subsequent parameters -- both of which are critical to downstream performance. Using this framework, we first investigate how model aggregation affects internal feature extraction process. Our analysis reveals that aggregation degrades feature quality and weakens the coupling between intermediate features and subsequent layers, both of which are well shaped during local training. More importantly, this degradation is not confined to specific layers but progressively accumulates with network depth -- a phenomenon we term Cumulative Feature Degradation (CFD). CFD significantly impairs the quality of penultimate-layer features and weakens their coupling with the classifier, ultimately degrading model performance. We further revisit several widely adopted solutions through the lens of layer-peeled feature extraction to understand why they are effective in addressing aggregation-induced performance drop. Our results show that their effectiveness lies in mitigating the feature degradation described above, which is well aligned with our observations.

Explore related subjects

cs.LGcs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Guogang Zhu, Xuefeng Liu, Jianwei Niu, Shaojie Tang, Xinghao Wu. 2025-02-05. The Other Side of the Coin: Unveiling the Downsides of Model Aggregation in Federated Learning from a Layer-peeled Perspective. https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.03231

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG↗