Table of Contents
Fetching ...

FairGFL: Privacy-Preserving Fairness-Aware Federated Learning with Overlapping Subgraphs

Zihao Zhou, Shusen Yang, Fangyuan Zhao, Xuebin Ren

TL;DR

This paper tackles fairness in graph federated learning when clients hold overlapping subgraphs that are imbalanced. It introduces FairGFL, a privacy-preserving framework that privately estimates overlapping ratios via Local Differential Privacy, then uses an interpretable fairness-aware aggregation and a composite loss with a max-loss regularizer to balance fairness and utility. The approach yields improved cross-client fairness (lower variance, higher entropy) while preserving model utility across four benchmark graph datasets, under various privacy budgets and overlap scenarios. The work advances practical, privacy-preserving collaborative graph learning by addressing overlap-induced heterogeneity and providing convergence analysis and empirical validation. The methods have potential impact for real-world federated graph applications requiring fair, privacy-conscious collaboration.

Abstract

Graph federated learning enables the collaborative extraction of high-order information from distributed subgraphs while preserving the privacy of raw data. However, graph data often exhibits overlap among different clients. Previous research has demonstrated certain benefits of overlapping data in mitigating data heterogeneity. However, the negative effects have not been explored, particularly in cases where the overlaps are imbalanced across clients. In this paper, we uncover the unfairness issue arising from imbalanced overlapping subgraphs through both empirical observations and theoretical reasoning. To address this issue, we propose FairGFL (FAIRness-aware subGraph Federated Learning), a novel algorithm that enhances cross-client fairness while maintaining model utility in a privacy-preserving manner. Specifically, FairGFL incorporates an interpretable weighted aggregation approach to enhance fairness across clients, leveraging privacy-preserving estimation of their overlapping ratios. Furthermore, FairGFL improves the tradeoff between model utility and fairness by integrating a carefully crafted regularizer into the federated composite loss function. Through extensive experiments on four benchmark graph datasets, we demonstrate that FairGFL outperforms four representative baseline algorithms in terms of both model utility and fairness.

FairGFL: Privacy-Preserving Fairness-Aware Federated Learning with Overlapping Subgraphs

TL;DR

This paper tackles fairness in graph federated learning when clients hold overlapping subgraphs that are imbalanced. It introduces FairGFL, a privacy-preserving framework that privately estimates overlapping ratios via Local Differential Privacy, then uses an interpretable fairness-aware aggregation and a composite loss with a max-loss regularizer to balance fairness and utility. The approach yields improved cross-client fairness (lower variance, higher entropy) while preserving model utility across four benchmark graph datasets, under various privacy budgets and overlap scenarios. The work advances practical, privacy-preserving collaborative graph learning by addressing overlap-induced heterogeneity and providing convergence analysis and empirical validation. The methods have potential impact for real-world federated graph applications requiring fair, privacy-conscious collaboration.

Abstract

Graph federated learning enables the collaborative extraction of high-order information from distributed subgraphs while preserving the privacy of raw data. However, graph data often exhibits overlap among different clients. Previous research has demonstrated certain benefits of overlapping data in mitigating data heterogeneity. However, the negative effects have not been explored, particularly in cases where the overlaps are imbalanced across clients. In this paper, we uncover the unfairness issue arising from imbalanced overlapping subgraphs through both empirical observations and theoretical reasoning. To address this issue, we propose FairGFL (FAIRness-aware subGraph Federated Learning), a novel algorithm that enhances cross-client fairness while maintaining model utility in a privacy-preserving manner. Specifically, FairGFL incorporates an interpretable weighted aggregation approach to enhance fairness across clients, leveraging privacy-preserving estimation of their overlapping ratios. Furthermore, FairGFL improves the tradeoff between model utility and fairness by integrating a carefully crafted regularizer into the federated composite loss function. Through extensive experiments on four benchmark graph datasets, we demonstrate that FairGFL outperforms four representative baseline algorithms in terms of both model utility and fairness.
Paper Structure (39 sections, 8 theorems, 2 equations, 13 figures, 5 tables, 2 algorithms)

This paper contains 39 sections, 8 theorems, 2 equations, 13 figures, 5 tables, 2 algorithms.

Key Result

Theorem 5.1

The mechanism $\mathcal{M}_{N}$ to obfuscate the graph nodes satisfies $\epsilon_a$-LDP.

Figures (13)

  • Figure 1: Workflow of node-classification graph learning and graph federated learning.
  • Figure 2: Model losses on overlapping graph data (Cora, CiteSeer) and non-graph datasets (EMNIST ByClass, Sent140).
  • Figure 3: Performance inconsistency across clients on overlapping graph data (Cora, CiteSeer) and non-graph datasets (EMNIST ByClass, Sent140).
  • Figure 4: The workflow of FairGFL. FairGFL comprises five main steps: privacy-preserving data perturbation (Step 1), local training (Step 2), overlapping ratio estimation (Step 3), fairness-aware aggregation (Step 4), and composite losses optimization (Step 5).
  • Figure 5: The model utility of different algorithms on graph FL data (Cora, CiteSeer, Ogbn-arxiv, and Reddit). The model utility is evaluated by the test loss and accuracy.
  • ...and 8 more figures

Theorems & Definitions (13)

  • Definition 3.1: Cross-client Fairness
  • Definition 3.2: Overlapping Graph Nodes
  • Definition 3.3: Overlapping links
  • Definition 3.4: Graph Node Overlapping Ratio
  • Definition 3.5: Link Overlapping Ratio
  • Theorem 5.1
  • Theorem 5.2
  • Theorem 5.3
  • Theorem 5.4
  • Theorem 5.5
  • ...and 3 more