Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose new website fingerprinting techniques that achieve a higher classification accuracy on Tor than previous works. We describe our novel methodology for gathering data on Tor; this methodology is essential for accurate classifier comparison and analysis. We offer new ways to interpret the data by using the more fundamental Tor cells as a unit of data rather than TCP/IP packets. We demonstrate an experimental method to remove Tor SENDMEs, which are control cells that provide no useful data, in order to improve accuracy. We also propose a new set of metrics to describe the similarity between two traffic instances; they are derived from observations on how a site is loaded. Using our new metrics we achieve a higher success rate than previous authors. We conduct a thorough analysis and comparison between our new algorithms and the previous best algorithm. To identify the potential power of website fingerprinting on Tor, we perform open-world experiments; we achieve a recall rate over 95% and a false positive rate under 0.2% for several potentially monitored sites, which far exceeds previous reported recall rates. In the closed-world experiments, our accuracy is 91%, as compared to 86-87% from the best previous classifier on the same data.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it