Privacy preserving frequent itemset mining
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
One crucial aspect of privacy preserving frequent itemset mining is the fact that the mining process deals with a trade-o#: privacy and accuracy, which are typically contradictory, and improving one usually incurs a cost in the other. One alternative to address this particular problem is to look for a balance between hiding restrictive patterns and disclosing nonrestrictive ones. In this paper, we propose a new framework for enforcing privacy in mining frequent itemsets. We combine, in a single framework, techniques for e#ciently hiding restrictive patterns: a transaction retrieval engine relying on an inverted file and Boolean queries; and a set of algorithms to "sanitize" a database. In addition, we introduce performance measures for mining frequent itemsets that quantify the fraction of mining patterns which are preserved after sanitizing a database. We also report the results of a performance evaluation of our research prototype and an analysis of the results.
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 | 0.000 |
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