Consider this scenario; a software development company has created a system for smart buildings. This software allows their clients, who are primarily real estate owners, to collect data from sensors installed throughout their properties. With this data, they can monitor various aspects of their buildings such as energy usage, temperature, and indoor climate.
The company developing this system could greatly benefit from building machine learning models, particularly for tasks like minimizing energy consumption in buildings. The vast amount of data collected from the customers' properties could provide a rich training set for these machine learning models.
However, integrating machine learning (ML) into their applications is not without challenges, especially when using data sourced from customers' installations.
Foremost among these challenges is data ownership. Customer installations are the origin of data, thus making customers the data owners. Exploiting this data currently often involves a practice of centralization, but this practice carries inherent risks.
Firstly, customers must consent to the movement and centralization of their data, a process sometimes met with resistance. While some may concede, others are likely to refuse.
.png)
Furthermore, the by-the-GDPR-promoted principle of data minimization inherently warns against duplicating, transferring, and storing customer data across various locations, managed by different entities. This principle champions data residing in its initial location, behind secure firewalls, which reduces the likelihood of security breach.
In addition, the growing amounts of regional data privacy and data transfer legislation can heavily influence the longevity of a data centralization approach. While it still sometimes aligns with data privacy norms and data transfer laws, the evolving landscape of privacy regulations across different regions doesn't assure long-term or even mid-term viability of this practice.
To go back to our smart building example, an alternative idea for realizing the value ofML-based energy optimization could be unique ML models for each customer. However, this approach has several drawbacks. Newer customers might not generate enough data for a robust model, and individual models might not generalize beyond the specific site. Training models from scratch for every new customer is neither efficient nor scalable.
.png)
Federated machine learning (FL) offers a potential solution. This privacy-centric approach trains models on multiple datasets without disclosing the actual data. Here, the ML algorithm is brought to the data, not the other way around. The system developer, as a trustworthy third party, receives only the model parameters, facilitating model training on its customers' collective data.
However, FL too has challenges. Its distributed training protocol requires robustness and security, making building an FL system a demanding task akin to developing your primary application.
This is where Scaleout comes in. We aim to make federated learning as accessible as conventional machine learning. Our software platform, Studio, simplifies the integration of FL into your application, handling FL in production with enterprise-level security.
We package and integrate with top-tier open-source MLOps tools for added convenience, offering a flexible and future-ready AI development environment. Leveraging our platform, you can enhance your software, circumventing privacy and data centralization issues.
With federated learning, system developers are able to tap into distributed datasets, transforming the constraints of data ownership and centralization into innovative opportunities, thus elevating their role as smart service providers. Utilizing tools like Scaleout's Studio ensures that integrating federated learning into existing applications is seamless, secure, and ultimately, a step towards an adaptive and privacy-centric future in machine learning.
%201.svg)
