When to Use Federated Learning: Trade-offs and Alternatives

Federated learning trades centralized data access for privacy, compliance, and edge compute utilization. Use it when data cannot move due to regulations like General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), institutional policies, or bandwidth constraints. Cross device FL fits mobile typing prediction, on device ranking, wake word detection, and input personalization where user privacy is critical and data is naturally distributed. Cross silo FL fits healthcare imaging consortia, fraud detection across banks, or multi region recommendation where institutions collaborate without sharing raw datasets.

The costs are significant. Communication rounds add latency: 10 to 30 minutes per round for cross device FL, 30 to 120 minutes for cross silo FL, versus seconds for centralized gradient descent. Non IID data slows convergence by 2x to 5x compared to centralized training. Secure aggregation and differential privacy add 10 to 30 percent overhead per round and can degrade accuracy by 2 to 5 percent. System reliability is harder because clients drop, versions skew, and stragglers delay rounds.

Prefer centralized training when data is aggregatable and you need rapid iteration, precise monitoring, and simpler operations. For privacy, consider alternatives like differential privacy on centralized data, which adds noise to aggregates without distributing training. Secure multi party computation computes functions over encrypted data but has high computational cost. Split learning keeps raw data local but sends intermediate activations to the server, reducing communication at the cost of some privacy leakage. Federated analytics computes aggregate statistics without training models, fitting use cases like telemetry and A/B testing metrics.

Google uses federated learning for Gboard and on device features where keystroke data is highly sensitive. They use centralized training for YouTube recommendations where video interaction logs can be aggregated with user consent. Apple uses federated learning for QuickType but centralized training for Siri voice recognition with opt in data collection. The decision hinges on whether privacy constraints outweigh the operational complexity and slower iteration cycles of federated systems.

💡 Key Takeaways

•Use federated learning when data cannot move due to GDPR, HIPAA, or institutional policy, or when bandwidth limits make centralized collection infeasible

•Cross device FL adds 10 to 30 minutes per round versus seconds for centralized training; cross silo FL adds 30 to 120 minutes per round, slowing iteration cycles significantly

•Non IID data in federated settings slows convergence by 2x to 5x, and secure aggregation plus differential privacy degrade accuracy by 2 to 5 percent compared to centralized training

•Prefer centralized training with differential privacy when data can be aggregated, offering simpler operations, faster iteration, and precise monitoring without distributing compute

•Split learning is an alternative that keeps raw data local but sends intermediate activations, reducing communication by 10x to 100x at the cost of some privacy leakage from activations

•Federated analytics computes aggregate statistics without model training, fitting telemetry and A/B testing when you need privacy preserving metrics but not personalized models

📌 Examples

Google uses federated learning for Gboard keyboard predictions where keystroke data is highly sensitive, but centralized training for YouTube recommendations with user consented interaction logs

A hospital consortium cannot centralize patient scans due to HIPAA, so they use cross silo FL with 50 hospitals, training a diagnostic model in 200 rounds over 2 weeks instead of 1 day centralized

Apple uses federated learning for QuickType autocorrect with strict on device processing, but centralized training for Siri voice recognition with opt in data collection and cloud processing

← Back to Federated Learning Overview