Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · November 6, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Smartphones, smart-home hubs, and wearables are increasingly exposed to sophisticated Android malware, while centralized threat-detection pipelines raise privacy and scalability concerns. Federated learning (FL) enables collaborative model training without collecting raw client data, but partial participation and variation in local model quality can destabilize global optimization. In this article, we propose DW-FedADMM, a federated optimization framework that combines primal-dual coordination with performance-dependent client-side weighting. The dynamic coefficient modulates each participating client's local state before the augmented-Lagrangian update, while the dual variables regulate disagreement between local and global model states. We evaluate DW-FedADMM on three Android malware benchmarks, namely Drebin, Malgenome, and TUANDROMD, with 5, 10, and 15 clients holding IID data shards, partial client participation, and communication budgets of 5 and 10 rounds. Each configuration is repeated with ten random seeds. DW-FedADMM obtains the highest seed-averaged accuracy on Drebin (97.64% +/- 0.20%) and the best mean accuracy in 9 of the 18 dataset-client-round configurations, including 7 of the 9 configurations with a 10-round budget. Pooled over all configurations, it reaches 95.42% accuracy, 94.62% F1-score, 96.06% precision, and 99.45% AUC, compared with 95.32%, 94.51%, 95.56%, and 99.41% for FedADMM, while also giving the lowest mean false-positive rate and the smallest client update norm among the six compared methods. Both primal-dual methods are well ahead of the averaging- and proximal-based baselines on Malgenome and TUANDROMD, where the latter often remain at the majority-class solution when clients are fragmented. The gain of dynamic weighting over FedADMM is most pronounced on Drebin and with the longer communication budget, where it also reduces the variation across seeds.