← 研踪 PaperTrailACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-srw.44 · 记录 #1
Does Locality Cost in Polish Medical Text Classification? Duplicate-Aware Evaluation of Federated Learning
来源日期（仅到月份） 2026-07
来源记录日期 2026-07
雷达观测 2026-11-01 21:44
摘要
Federated learning is often framed as a practical trade-off in clinical NLP: safer data handling at the cost of lower predictive performance. We revisit this assumption in a benchmark-specific study of Polish medical text classification. A key issue is evaluation granularity: the test split contains 10,634 rows but only 670 unique normalized text hashes, with 18 inconsistent groups removed in strict grouped evaluation. We therefore compare centralized and federated training under both conventional instance-level scoring and a stricter hash-level protocol that controls duplicate inflation. In the strongest reported settings, federated training matches or slightly exceeds the centralized baseline, reaching instance-level Macro-F1 of 0.8826 ± 0.0177 versus 0.8689 ± 0.0124, and hash-level Macro-F1 of 0.8908 ± 0.0220 versus 0.8841 ± 0.0078. The claim is deliberately narrow: we do not argue that federated learning is generally superior to centralized training, nor do we claim formal privacy guarantees. Rather, we show that in this duplicate-heavy Polish medical text benchmark, conclusions about locality depend strongly on evaluation hygiene.
论文发现出处
这些页面提供论文线索，不代表同行评审或质量认证。
观测到的版本
平台记录号代表本站观测到的元数据变化，不是作者修订号。来源日期仅到月份或年份时，按该月或该年首日存档。
记录 #1 · 2026-07 · 最新观测版本
Does Locality Cost in Polish Medical Text Classification? Duplicate-Aware Evaluation of Federated Learning
Federated learning is often framed as a practical trade-off in clinical NLP: safer data handling at the cost of lower predictive performance. We revisit this assumption in a benchmark-specific study of Polish medical text classification. A key issue is evaluation granularity: the test split contains 10,634 rows but only 670 unique normalized text hashes, with 18 inconsistent groups removed in strict grouped evaluation. We therefore compare centralized and federated training under both conventional instance-level scoring and a stricter hash-level protocol that controls duplicate inflation. In the strongest reported settings, federated training matches or slightly exceeds the centralized baseline, reaching instance-level Macro-F1 of 0.8826 ± 0.0177 versus 0.8689 ± 0.0124, and hash-level Macro-F1 of 0.8908 ± 0.0220 versus 0.8841 ± 0.0078. The claim is deliberately narrow: we do not argue that federated learning is generally superior to centralized training, nor do we claim formal privacy guarantees. Rather, we show that in this duplicate-heavy Polish medical text benchmark, conclusions about locality depend strongly on evaluation hygiene.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗