logo

SCIENCE CHINA Information Sciences, Volume 64 , Issue 10 : 202101(2021) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-020-3062-8

Jupiter: a modern federated learning platform for regional medical care

More info
  • ReceivedFeb 21, 2020
  • AcceptedJul 31, 2020
  • PublishedSep 9, 2021

Abstract


Acknowledgment

This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 62041203, 92067206, 61972222) and National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant No. 2018YFB2100804).


References

[1] M?enp?? T, Suominen T, Asikainen P. The outcomes of regional healthcare information systems in health care: A review of the research literature. Int J Med Inf, 2009, 78: 757-771 CrossRef Google Scholar

[2] Adler-Milstein J, McAfee A P, Bates D W. The State Of Regional Health Information Organizations: Current Activities And Financing. Health Affairs, 2007, 26: w60-w69 CrossRef Google Scholar

[3] Miotto R, Li L, Kidd B A. Deep Patient: An Unsupervised Representation to Predict the Future of Patients from the Electronic Health Records. Sci Rep, 2016, 6: 26094 CrossRef ADS Google Scholar

[4] Konečn`y J, McMahan H B, Yu F X, et al. Federated learning: Strategies for improving communication efficiency. 2016,. arXiv Google Scholar

[5] Zhang S, Zhang S, Chen X, et al. Cloud computing research and development trend. In: Proceedings of 2010 2nd International Conference on Future Networks, 2010. 93--97. Google Scholar

[6] Wang H, Shi P, Zhang Y. Jointcloud: a cross-cloud cooperation architecture for integrated internet service customization. In: Proceedings of 2017 IEEE 37th International Conference On Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), 2017. 1846--1855. Google Scholar

[7] Jiang Z, Yin H. Adaptive routing algorithm for joint cloud video delivery. In: Proceedings of 2017 IEEE 37th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops (ICDCSW), 2017. 316--319. Google Scholar

[8] Shi P, Wang H, Yue X, et al. Corporation architecture for multiple cloud service providers in jointcloud computing. In: Proceedings of 2017 IEEE 37th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops (ICDCSW), 2017. 294--298. Google Scholar

[9] McMahan H B, Moore E, Ramage D, et al. Communication-efficient learning of deep networks from decentralized data. 2016,. arXiv Google Scholar

[10] Li Q, Wen Z, and He B. Federated learning systems: vision, hype and reality for data privacy and protection. 2019,. arXiv Google Scholar

[11] Liu D, Miller T, Sayeed R, et al. Fadl: Federated-autonomous deep learning for distributed electronic health record. 2018,. arXiv Google Scholar

[12] Yang Q, Liu Y, Chen T. Federated Machine Learning. ACM Trans Intell Syst Technol, 2019, 10: 1-19 CrossRef Google Scholar

[13] Sahu A K, Li T, Sanjabi M, et al. On the convergence of federated optimization in heterogeneous networks. 2018,. arXiv Google Scholar

[14] Jiang P, Agrawal G. A linear speedup analysis of distributed deep learning with sparse and quantized communication. In: Proceedings of Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2018. 2525--2536. Google Scholar

[15] Shokri R, Shmatikov V. Privacy-preserving deep learning. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2015. 1310--1321. Google Scholar

[16] Melis L, Song C, de Cristofaro E, et al. Inference attacks against collaborative learning. 2018,. arXiv Google Scholar

[17] Bonawitz K, Ivanov V, Kreuter B, et al. Practical secure aggregation for privacy-preserving machine learning. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2017. 1175--1191. Google Scholar

[18] Geyer R C, Klein T, Nabi M. Differentially private federated learning: a client level perspective. 2017,. arXiv Google Scholar

[19] McMahan H B, Ramage D, Talwar K, et al. Learning differentially private recurrent language models. 2017,. arXiv Google Scholar

[20] Wang H, Sievert S, Liu S, et al. ATOMO: communication-efficient learning via atomic sparsification. In: Proceedings of Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2018. 9850--9861. Google Scholar

[21] Bonawitz K, Eichner H, Grieskamp W, et al. Towards federated learning at scale: System design. 2019,. arXiv Google Scholar

[22] Costan V, Devadas S. Intel SGX explained. IACR Cryptol ePrint Archive, 2016, 2016: 1--118. Google Scholar

[23] Taassori M, Shafiee A, Balasubramonian R. VAULT: reducing paging overheads in SGX with efficient integrity verification structures. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGPLAN Notices, 2018. 665--678. Google Scholar

[24] Orenbach M, Lifshits P, Minkin M, et al. Eleos: exitless OS services for SGX enclaves. In: Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Computer Systems, 2017. 238--253. Google Scholar

[25] Xing B C, Shanahan M, Leslie-Hurd R. Intel® software guard extensions (Intel® SGX) software support for dynamic memory allocation inside an enclave. In: Proceedings of the Hardware and Architectural Support for Security and Privacy, 2016. 11. Google Scholar

[26] Weisse O, Bertacco V, Austin T. Regaining Lost Cycles with HotCalls. SIGARCH Comput Archit News, 2017, 45: 81-93 CrossRef Google Scholar

[27] Krahn R, Trach B, Vahldiek-Oberwagner A, et al. Pesos: policy enhanced secure object store. In: Proceedings of the 13th ACM European Conference on Computer Systems (EuroSys), 2018. 25. Google Scholar

[28] Priebe C, Vaswani K, Costa M. Enclavedb: a secure database using SGX. In: Proceedings of 2018 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), 2018. 264--278. Google Scholar

[29] Kim T, Park J, Woo J, et al. Shieldstore: shielded in-memory key-value storage with SGX. In: Proceedings of the 14th ACM European Conference on Computer Systems (EuroSys), 2019. 14. Google Scholar

[30] Bailleu M, Thalheim J, Bhatotia P, et al. $\{$SPEICHER$\}$: securing LSM-based key-value stores using shielded execution. In: Proceedings of 17th $\{$USENIX$\}$ Conference on File and Storage Technologies ($\{$FAST$\}$ 19), 2019. 173--190. Google Scholar

[31] Tsai C C, Porter D E, Vij M. Graphene-SGX: a practical library $\{$OS$\}$ for unmodified applications on $\{$SGX$\}$. In: Proceedings of 2017 $\{$USENIX$\}$ Annual Technical Conference ($\{$USENIX$\}$$\{$ATC$\}$ 17), 2017. 645--658. Google Scholar

[32] Arnautov S, Trach B, Gregor F, et al. $\{$SCONE$\}$: secure linux containers with intel $\{$SGX$\}$. In: Proceedings of the 12th $\{$USENIX$\}$ Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation ($\{$OSDI$\}$ 16), 2016. 689--703. Google Scholar

[33] Ahmad A, Kim K, Sarfaraz M I, et al. Obliviate: a data oblivious filesystem for Intel SGX. In: Proceedings of Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, 2018. Google Scholar

[34] Shinde S, Wang S, Yuan P, et al. BesFS: mechanized proof of an iago-safe filesystem for enclaves. 2018,. arXiv Google Scholar

[35] Duan H, Wang C, Yuan X, et al. Lightbox: full-stack protected stateful middlebox at lightning speed. In: Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2019. 2351--2367. Google Scholar

[36] Poddar R, Lan C, Popa R A, et al. Safebricks: shielding network functions in the cloud. In: Proceedings of the 15th $\{$USENIX$\}$ Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation ($\{$NSDI$\}$ 18), 2018. 201--216. Google Scholar

[37] Kim S, Han J, Ha J, et al. Enhancing security and privacy of tor's ecosystem by using trusted execution environments. In: Proceedings of 14th $\{$USENIX$\}$ Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation ($\{$NSDI$\}$ 17), 2017. 145--161. Google Scholar

[38] Goltzsche D, Wulf C, Muthukumaran D, et al. Trustjs: trusted client-side execution of javascript. In: Proceedings of the 10th European Workshop on Systems Security, 2017. 7. Google Scholar

[39] Ghosn A, Larus J R, Bugnion E. Secured routines: language-based construction of trusted execution environments. In: Proceedings of 2019 $\{$USENIX$\}$ Annual Technical Conference ($\{$USENIX$\}$$\{$ATC$\}$ 19), 2019. 571--586. Google Scholar

[40] Zheng W, Dave A, Beekman J G, et al. Opaque: an oblivious and encrypted distributed analytics platform. In: Proceedings of the 14th $\{$USENIX$\}$ Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation ($\{$NSDI$\}$ 17), 2017. 283--298. Google Scholar

[41] Havet A, Pires R, Felber P, et al. Securestreams: a reactive middleware framework for secure data stream processing. In: Proceedings of the 11th ACM International Conference on Distributed and Event-based Systems, 2017. 124--133. Google Scholar

[42] Schuster F, Costa M, Fournet C, et al. VC3: trustworthy data analytics in the cloud using SGX. In: Proceedings of 2015 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2015. 38--54. Google Scholar

[43] Sheth A P, Larson J A. Federated database systems for managing distributed, heterogeneous, and autonomous databases. ACM Comput Surv, 1990, 22: 183-236 CrossRef Google Scholar

[44] Jayarajan A, Wei J, Gibson G, et al. Priority-based parameter propagation for distributed dnn training. 2019,. arXiv Google Scholar

[45] Nasr M, Shokri R, Houmansadr A. Comprehensive privacy analysis of deep learning: passive and active white-box inference attacks against centralized and federated learning. In: Proceedings of 2019 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), 2019. 739--753. Google Scholar

[46] Cho J, Chang H, Mukherjee S, et al. Typhoon: an SDN enhanced real-time big data streaming framework. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Emerging Networking Experiments and Technologies, 2017. 310--322. Google Scholar

qqqq

Contact and support