journal article·2026-01-15Open access

SeqFAL: A Federated Active Learning Framework for Private and Efficient Labeling of Security Requirements

Waad Alhoshan

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 2

Abstract

Security requirements play a critical role in ensuring the trustworthiness and resilience of software systems; however, their automatic classification remains challenging due to limited labeled data, confidentiality constraints, and the heterogeneous nature of requirements across organizations. Existing approaches typically assume centralized access to training data and rely on costly manual annotation, making them unsuitable for distributed industrial settings. To address these challenges, we propose SeqFAL, a communication-efficient and privacy-preserving Federated Active Learning framework for natural language–based security requirements classification. SeqFAL integrates frozen pre-trained sentence embeddings, margin-based active learning, and lightweight federated aggregation of linear classifiers, enabling collaborative model training without sharing raw requirement text. We evaluate SeqFAL on a combined dataset of SeqReq dataset and the PROMISE-NFR dataset under varying federation sizes, query budgets, and communication rounds, and compare it against three baselines: centralized learning, active learning without federated aggregation, and federated learning without active querying. In addition to the proposed margin-based sampling strategy, we investigate alternative query strategies, including least-confidence and random sampling, as well as multiple linear classifiers such as LinearSVC and SGD-based classifiers with logistic and hinge losses. Results show that SeqFAL consistently outperforms FL-only and achieves performance comparable to AL-only centralized baselines, while approaching the optimal upper bound using significantly fewer labeled samples. These findings demonstrate that the joint integration of federated learning and active learning provides an effective and privacy-preserving strategy for security requirements classification in distributed software engineering environments.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Advanced Malware Detection Techniques · Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data · Information and Cyber Security

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Computer Science, College of Computer and Information Sciences, Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University (IMSIU), Riyadh 13318, Saudi Arabia

References (37)

Show source-provided references
1. Natural language processing for requirements engineering: A systematic mapping study
2. Knauss, E., Houmb, S., Schneider, K., Islam, S., and Jürjens, J. (2011, January 28–30). Supporting requirements engineers in recognising security issues. Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality, (REFSQ 2011), Essen, Germany.10.1007/978-3-642-19858-8_2 ↗
3. Engineering security requirements
4. Kadebu, P., Sikka, S., Tyagi, R.K., and Chiurunge, P. (2023). A classification approach for software requirements towards maintainable security. Sci. Afr., 19.10.1016/j.sciaf.2022.e01496 ↗
5. Varenov, V., and Gabdrahmanov, A. (2021, January 20–24). Security requirements classification into groups using nlp transformers. Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 29th International Requirements Engineering Conference Workshops (REW), Notre Dame, IN, USA.10.1109/REW53955.2021.9714713 ↗
6. Automated categorization of software security requirements: An NLP and ML based approach10.1007/s00766-025-00443-8 ↗
7. Zhao, L., and Alhoshan, W. (2025). Machine Learning for Requirements Classification. Handbook on Natural Language Processing for Requirements Engineering, Springer.10.1007/978-3-031-73143-3_2 ↗
8. Security Requirements Engineering: A Framework for Representation and Analysis10.1109/TSE.2007.70754 ↗
9. Systematic Mapping Study on Security Approaches in Secure Software Engineering10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3052311 ↗
10. Federated Machine Learning: Concept and Applications10.1145/3339474 ↗
11. McMahan, B., Moore, E., Ramage, D., Hampson, S., and y Arcas, B.A. (2017, January 20–22). Communication-efficient learning of deep networks from decentralized data. Proceedings of the Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA. Available online: https://proceedings.mlr.press/v54/mcmahan17a.html.
12. Advances and Open Problems in Federated Learning10.1561/2200000083 ↗
13. Nasajpour, M., Pouriyeh, S., Parizi, R.M., Han, M., Mosaiyebzadeh, F., Liu, L., Xie, Y., and Batista, D.M. (2025). Federated Learning in Smart Healthcare: A Survey of Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions. Electronics, 14.10.3390/electronics14091750 ↗
14. Kumar, R., Shieh, C.S., Chakrabarti, P., Kumar, A., Moolchandani, J., and Sinha, R. (2025). Privacy-Preserving Federated Learning in Healthcare, E-Commerce, and Finance: A Taxonomy of Security Threats and Mitigation Strategies. EPJ Web Conf., 328.10.1051/epjconf/202532801066 ↗
15. Clients Eligibility-Based Lightweight Protocol in Federated Learning: An IDS Use Case10.1109/TNSM.2024.3398213 ↗
16. Federated learning for feature-fusion based requirement classification10.1007/s10586-023-04147-y ↗
17. Settles, B. (2009). Active Learning Literature Survey, University of Wisconsin–Madison. Available online: http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1793/60660.
18. A Survey on Deep Active Learning: Recent Advances and New Frontiers10.1109/TNNLS.2024.3396463 ↗
19. Shelmanov, A., Puzyrev, D., Kupriyanova, L., Belyakov, D., Larionov, D., Khromov, N., Kozlova, O., Artemova, E., Dylov, D.V., and Panchenko, A. (2021, January 19–23). Active Learning for Sequence Tagging with Deep Pre-trained Models and Bayesian Uncertainty Estimates. Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Main Volume, Online.10.18653/v1/2021.eacl-main.145 ↗
20. Magalhães, C., Araujo, J., and Sardinha, A. (2021, January 20–24). MARE: An Active Learning Approach for Requirements Classification. Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 29th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), Notre Dame, IN, USA.10.1109/RE51729.2021.9714537 ↗
21. Active Learning with Pre-trained Language Models for Named Entity Recognition in Requirements Engineering10.1016/j.procir.2024.06.027 ↗
22. An empirical study on LLM-based classification of requirements-related provisions in food-safety regulations10.1007/s10664-025-10619-z ↗
23. Alhoshan, W., Ferrari, A., and Zhao, L. (2023). Zero-shot learning for requirements classification: An exploratory study. Inf. Softw. Technol., 159.10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107202 ↗
24. Petrillo, L., Martinelli, F., Santone, A., and Mercaldo, F. (2025). Explainable Security Requirements Classification Through Transformer Models. Future Internet, 17.10.3390/fi17010015 ↗
25. Cleland-Huang, J., Mazrouee, S., Liguo, H., and Port, D. (2007). NFR Dataset, Zenodo.
26. FedLFP: Communication-Efficient Personalized Federated Learning on Non-IID Data in Mobile Edge Computing Environments10.1109/TMC.2025.3558406 ↗
27. Wang, J., Zhang, S., Xu, Y., Zhang, Z., Yang, X., and Cheng, Y. (2025). ILAMP: Improved text extraction from gradients in federated learning using language model priors and sequence beam search. Expert Syst. Appl., 271.10.1016/j.eswa.2025.126592 ↗
28. Wang, R., Yu, T., Zhang, R., Kim, S., Rossi, R., Zhao, H., Wu, J., Mitra, S., Yao, L., and Henao, R. (2024, January 16–21). Personalized Federated Learning for Text Classification with Gradient-Free Prompt Tuning. Proceedings of the Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: NAACL 2024, Mexico City, Mexico.10.18653/v1/2024.findings-naacl.286 ↗
29. Huo, Z., Fan, Y., and Huang, Y. (2023). A Communication-Efficient Federated Text Classification Method Based on Parameter Pruning. Mathematics, 11.10.3390/math11132804 ↗
30. Casillo, F., Deufemia, V., and Gravino, C. (2025). Beyond domain dependency in security requirements identification. Inf. Softw. Technol., 182.10.1016/j.infsof.2025.107702 ↗
31. Federated learning: Challenges, methods, and future directions
32. Knauss, E., Houmb, S.H., Islam, S., Jürjens, J., and Schneider, K. (2021). SecReq, Zenodo.
33. Kobilica, A., Ayub, M., and Hassine, J. (2020, January 15–17). Automated identification of security requirements: A machine learning approach. Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, Trondheim, Norway.10.1145/3383219.3383288 ↗
34. Automated classification of non-functional requirements10.1007/s00766-007-0045-1 ↗
35. Hess, A., and Susi, A. (2025). Automatic Prompt Engineering: The Case of Requirements Classification. Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality, 31st International Working Conference, REFSQ 2025, Barcelona, Spain, 7–10 April 2025, Proceedings, Springer.10.1007/978-3-031-88531-0 ↗
36. Gervasi, V., and Vogelsang, A. (2022). A Zero-Shot Learning Approach to Classifying Requirements: A Preliminary Study. Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality: 28th International Working Conference, REFSQ 2022, Birmingham, UK, 21–24 March 2022, Proceedings, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-98464-9 ↗
37. Federated Learning Models for Privacy-Preserving AI In Enterprise Decision Systems10.63125/ry033286 ↗