Vertical forward propagation is the distributed execution of a neural network's forward pass in a Vertical Federated Learning (VFL) system. In this paradigm, the complete model is split at a designated cut layer. Each feature owner computes the forward pass on its local subset of features for the aligned entities, producing an intermediate output. This encrypted or protected result is then transmitted to the next party (typically the label owner) to compute the remaining layers and generate the final prediction, all without exposing raw private data.
Glossary
Vertical Forward Propagation

What is Vertical Forward Propagation?
The distributed forward pass in a split neural network for vertically partitioned data.
This process is the foundational computation step in each VFL training and inference round. Its design directly impacts vertical communication overhead, as intermediate tensors must be exchanged, and system security, as outputs must be protected via encryption or secure multi-party computation (MPC) protocols. Efficient vertical forward propagation is critical for the practical deployment of VFL in privacy-sensitive domains like finance and healthcare.
Key Components of Vertical Forward Propagation
Vertical forward propagation is the distributed execution of a neural network's forward pass in a Vertical Federated Learning (VFL) system. It involves coordinated computation across multiple parties, each holding a distinct slice of the feature space for the same entities.
Split Neural Network Architecture
The core model architecture enabling VFL. The neural network is partitioned at a designated cut layer. The bottom model segments reside with feature owners, who compute on their local features. The top model segment resides with the label owner, who receives intermediate outputs to complete the forward pass and compute the loss. This split enforces data separation by design.
The Cut Layer
The specific layer where the neural network is divided between parties. Its placement is a critical system design choice with major trade-offs:
- Privacy vs. Utility: A later cut layer (deeper in the network) allows more complex feature extraction locally but risks exposing more revealing data patterns.
- Communication vs. Computation: An earlier cut layer reduces local computation for feature owners but increases the dimensionality of the intermediate outputs that must be transmitted.
Intermediate Outputs (Embeddings)
The encrypted or protected tensors passed from a feature owner to the label owner. These are the activations at the cut layer, representing a transformed, abstract representation of the local raw features. They are the only data exchanged during the forward pass, forming the privacy boundary. Their size directly impacts vertical communication overhead.
Secure Communication Channel
The encrypted pipeline for transmitting intermediate outputs and gradients. It prevents eavesdropping on the data in transit. Common technologies include:
- Transport Layer Security (TLS) for channel encryption.
- Homomorphic Encryption (HE) for computing on encrypted data, allowing the label owner to process encrypted intermediates.
- Secure Multi-Party Computation (MPC) protocols for joint computation without revealing private inputs.
Coordinated Execution Protocol
The step-by-step sequence governing the forward pass. A standard protocol for a single feature owner and label owner is:
- Entity Alignment: Parties privately identify common samples (e.g., using PSI).
- Local Forward Pass: Feature owner computes forward pass on its local model segment up to the cut layer.
- Secure Transmission: Feature owner sends the encrypted intermediate output to the label owner.
- Completion of Forward Pass: Label owner decrypts (if using HE) or processes the input, completes its top model segment, and computes the prediction and loss.
Privacy-Preserving Mechanisms
Additional safeguards applied to intermediate outputs to prevent data reconstruction or inference attacks. These are often used in conjunction with secure channels:
- Differential Privacy (DP): Adding calibrated statistical noise to the intermediate outputs before they are shared.
- Gradient Perturbation: Applying noise during the subsequent backpropagation step.
- Functional Encryption: Allowing the label owner to compute only the specific loss function on the received data, nothing else.
Vertical vs. Horizontal Forward Propagation
A comparison of the forward pass mechanisms in the two primary federated learning paradigms, highlighting differences in data structure, communication patterns, and computational roles.
| Feature | Vertical Forward Propagation (VFL) | Horizontal Forward Propagation (HFL) |
|---|---|---|
Core Data Partition | Features (columns) are split across parties for the same entities. | Samples (rows) are split across parties; each party has all features for its local samples. |
Entity Scope | Parties collaborate on a shared, aligned set of entities (e.g., common user IDs). | Each party operates on its own distinct set of entities; no entity overlap is required. |
Model Architecture | Split neural network; each party holds a segment of the full model. | Each party holds a complete, local copy of the global model architecture. |
Forward Pass Flow | Sequential and chained. Feature owners compute intermediate outputs and pass them to the next party (e.g., the label owner). | Parallel and independent. Each client performs a full forward pass on its local data in isolation. |
Communication Trigger | Per sample/batch during the forward pass to send intermediate results. | Per training round to send updated model parameters (gradients or weights) to the server. |
Primary Communication Payload | Intermediate activations (tensors) from the cut layer. | Model updates (full gradients or weights). |
Orchestrator Role | Often the label owner, which receives intermediates and completes the forward/backward pass. | A central server, which aggregates model updates from clients. |
Privacy Leakage Risk | Intermediate outputs may reveal information about raw features; requires cryptographic protection. | Model updates may be inverted to reveal training data; mitigated via secure aggregation. |
Typical Use Case | Cross-silo collaboration between organizations with different data types on the same customers (e.g., bank + retailer). | Cross-device training on millions of user devices (e.g., next-word prediction on smartphones). |
Computation Overhead | Asymmetric; label owner bears the brunt of the core network computation. Feature owners compute smaller sub-networks. | Symmetric; each client performs a full forward and backward pass on its local data. |
Cryptographic Need | High, for securing the transmission of intermediate tensors (e.g., homomorphic encryption). | Moderate, primarily for securing the aggregation of updates (e.g., secure aggregation). |
Protocol Example | A feature owner computes to the cut layer, encrypts the output, sends it to the label owner for the final layers and loss calculation. | Each client trains locally for E epochs, then sends its model update to the server for averaging (Federated Averaging). |
Frequently Asked Questions
Vertical forward propagation is the distributed execution of a neural network's forward pass in Vertical Federated Learning (VFL). These questions address its core mechanics, security, and practical implementation.
Vertical forward propagation is the distributed computation of a neural network's forward pass in a Vertical Federated Learning (VFL) system, where each participating party computes the activations for its locally held subset of features and sequentially passes encrypted intermediate outputs to the next party to continue the computation.
In this paradigm, the complete model is split into segments at a designated cut layer. The feature owner (or owners) performs the forward pass on their local model segment using their private features. The result—an intermediate tensor—is then securely transmitted (often using homomorphic encryption or secure multi-party computation) to the label owner, who completes the forward pass through the remaining layers to produce the final prediction. This process enables collaborative model execution without any party exposing its raw input data.
Enabling Efficiency, Speed & Accuracy
Intelligent Analysis, Decision & Execution
We build AI systems for teams that need search across company data, workflow automation across tools, or AI features inside products and internal software.
Talk to Us
Search across company data
Give teams answers from docs, tickets, runbooks, and product data with sources and permissions.
Useful when people spend too long searching or get different answers from different systems.

Automate internal workflows
Use AI to route work, draft outputs, trigger actions, and keep approvals and logs in place.
Useful when repetitive work moves across multiple tools and teams.

Add AI to products and internal tools
Build assistants, guided actions, or decision support into the software your team or customers already use.
Useful when AI needs to be part of the product, not a separate tool.
Related Terms
Vertical Forward Propagation is a core mechanism within Vertical Federated Learning (VFL). The following terms define the essential components, protocols, and cryptographic safeguards that enable this distributed forward pass.
Split Neural Network
The foundational model architecture for VFL. The neural network is vertically split at a designated cut layer. Each participating party (e.g., a feature owner) holds and computes only its segment of the model on its local features.
- Local Bottom Model: The portion of the network from the input layer up to the cut layer, residing with a feature owner.
- Top Model: The portion from the cut layer to the output layer, typically held by the label owner.
Cut Layer
The specific layer where a split neural network is divided between parties. It is a critical hyperparameter that determines:
- Privacy-Computation Trade-off: A later cut layer means more computation is done locally by feature owners, enhancing privacy but increasing their computational load.
- Communication Cost: Defines the size and dimensionality of the intermediate output that must be transmitted.
- Model Performance: Impacts gradient flow and can affect final model accuracy.
Intermediate Output
The tensor result of the forward pass up to the cut layer. This is the core data object exchanged during Vertical Forward Propagation.
- Computation: Generated locally by a feature owner using its private features and its segment of the model.
- Transmission: Securely sent to the next party (usually the label owner) to continue the forward pass.
- Security Critical: This output contains a latent representation of the raw input data and is a primary target for privacy protection via encryption or perturbation.
Vertical Training Protocol
The defined sequence of steps governing a complete training round in VFL. Vertical Forward Propagation is the first major phase of this protocol.
A standard protocol involves:
- Entity Alignment & PSI: Securely identify common samples.
- Forward Propagation: Feature owners compute and send encrypted intermediate outputs.
- Label Owner Computation: Completes the forward pass, computes loss.
- Backward Propagation: Gradients are calculated and passed back securely.
- Secure Update: Each party updates its local model segment.
Homomorphic Encryption for VFL
A primary cryptographic method for securing Vertical Forward Propagation. It allows computations to be performed directly on encrypted data.
- Mechanism: A feature owner encrypts its intermediate output before sending it to the label owner.
- Computation on Ciphertext: The label owner can perform the forward pass of its top model on this encrypted input.
- Output: The result (e.g., loss, logits) remains encrypted, enabling secure vertical backpropagation. This prevents the label owner from learning the feature owner's private data from the intermediate values.
Vertical Multi-Party Computation (MPC)
A broader class of cryptographic protocols used to implement privacy-preserving VFL. MPC enables multiple parties to jointly compute a function (like a model's forward pass) over their private inputs without revealing those inputs to each other.
- Contrast with HE: Often more communication-intensive but can support arbitrary computations without the limitations of specific homomorphic encryption schemes.
- Common Frameworks: Protocols like SPDZ or ABY are adapted for VFL to securely compute activation functions and aggregate gradients across the split neural network.

About the author
Prasad Kumkar
CEO & MD, Inference Systems
Prasad Kumkar is the CEO & MD of Inference Systems and writes about AI systems architecture, LLM infrastructure, model serving, evaluation, and production deployment. Over 5+ years, he has worked across computer vision models, L5 autonomous vehicle systems, and LLM research, with a focus on taking complex AI ideas into real-world engineering systems.
His work and writing cover AI systems, large language models, AI agents, multimodal systems, autonomous systems, inference optimization, RAG, evaluation, and production AI engineering.
Partnered with leading AI, data, and software stack.
How We Work
Custom AI workflows for your Business
One-fit-all AI don't work for modern businesses. At Inferensys, we aim to understand your business & custom requirements; which we use to define most efficient agentic workflows, the data, and the tools for your business.
01
Review the use case
We understand the task, the users, and where AI can actually help.
Read more02
Pick the right approach
We define what needs search, automation, or product integration.
Read more03
Build the first useful version
We implement the part that proves the value first.
Read more04
Improve from there
We add the checks and visibility needed to keep it useful.
Read moreThe first call is a practical review of your use case and the right next step.
Talk to Us