Skip to content
Review Open access

A Fairness Perspective on Client Selection and Aggregation Methods for Non-IID Mitigation in Federated Learning: A Survey

Jul 2026 · Electronics · Vol 15, pp. 3178 · 0 citations · 71 references

TL;DR

This survey aims to provide a structured perspective on the relationship between non-IID mitigation and fairness and support the development of more balanced and scalable FL systems under non-IID conditions.

Abstract

Federated learning (FL) is a promising approach for training distributed machine learning models while preserving clients’ data privacy. However, in real-world FL systems, data are often not independent and identically distributed (non-IID). This heterogeneity can slow convergence, degrade model performance, and increase client drift. To address these challenges, numerous methods have been proposed to mitigate non-IID data effects by optimizing client selection, local training, and model aggregation strategies. Despite their effectiveness in improving performance and efficiency, these methods rarely consider fairness across clients. Improving global accuracy does not guarantee balanced participation, influence, or outcomes, which may lead to biased model behavior across clients. In this survey, we review existing non-IID mitigation methods in FL from a fairness perspective and provide a systematic analysis of their implicit impact on client participation and influence. Unlike prior surveys that treat fairness as a separate research direction, this work analyzes how these methods designed for non-IID mitigation implicitly shape fairness outcomes across clients. Our taxonomy classifies existing methods into three categories—fairness-aware, semi-fairness-aware, and fairness-unaware—based on their design strategies for client selection and model aggregation. Using this taxonomy, we analyze the advantages, trade-offs, and limitations of each category and highlight that mitigating non-IID data does not guarantee fairness across clients. Finally, we identify open challenges and outline future directions, including system-level FL design that jointly considers non-IID mitigation and fairness and the development of standardized fairness evaluation metrics. Overall, this survey aims to provide a structured perspective on the relationship between non-IID mitigation and fairness and support the development of more balanced and scalable FL systems under non-IID conditions.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Preprint Aug 2026

Assessing the Impacts of Imperfect Datasets on Client Selections in Federated Learning

This study experimentally measures the impact of non-IID data, noisy data, and fairness in client selection on model accuracy and convergence, and proposes a privacy-preserving scoring method to assess each client's contribution in FL.

Yuan-Heng Tsai, Li-Hsing Yen, Yan-Wei Chen · 0 citations
Open access 2026

A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of Data Selection Impact on Machine Learning Fairness and Utility

The results show that ML data selection can hurt model fairness in a non-negligible number of cases, and compromise model utility in more than half of the cases, and provide interesting research directions for utility- and fairness-aware ML data selection.

Nawel Benarba, Zeyang Kong, Sara Bouchenak · 1 citation
#federated learning Open access Aug 2026

Federated learning with multiple, intersectional and multiclass fairness guarantees under performance budgets

FedFairLAB is introduced, a FL method that enforces group, intersectional, and multiclass fairness simultaneously at both the local and global levels and a tunable performance budget allows practitioners to control how much predictive performance can be sacrificed to improve fairness.

Michele Fontana, Francesca Naretto, A. Monreale · 0 citations
#machine learning Preprint Sep 2026

Pathwise Individual Rationality in Federated Learning: A Mechanism-Architecture Co-Design

Participation in federated learning (FL) comes at a cost. Clients trade off privacy, communication, and compute costs for potentially greater gains in model efficacy. This paper explores this tradeoff under the aegis of individual rationality (IR) versus autarky, the basic game-theoretic requirement that the federation...

Amin Meghrazi, Srinivasan Parthasarathy, A. Perrault · 0 citations
2026

D3em: A Dual-Layer Dynamic Debiasing Evaluation Mechanism for Client Contribution in Federated Learning

Accurate client contribution evaluation is critical for sustainable federated learning and incentive design, yet existing methods face a trade-off between trust, complexity, and robustness. We show that validation-free, similarity-based metrics can suffer from a federated noise coupling effect, where historical low-qua...

Zhong-Chi Wang, Zheng-Yang Zhao, Hai-Long Sun · 0 citations
Open access 2026

Federated Learning With Noisy and Imbalanced Data: A Contrastive Reliability-Based Framework for Long-Tail-Aware Client Selection

ConTaFL is introduced, a contrastive and tail-aware FL client selection framework that systematically addresses the aforementioned key challenges through coordinated mechanisms and consistently outperforms state-of-the-art FL frameworks across diverse noisy and non-IID settings while improving global model robustness a...

Fahmida Islam, Adnan Mahmood, Ying-Xun Wang et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.