Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growing need to address privacy concerns when social network data is released for mining purposes has recently led to considerable interest in various techniques for graph anonymization. In this paper, we study the following problem: Given a social network modeled as an edge-labeled graph G, we aim to make a pre-specifled subset of vertices of G k-label sequence anonymous with the minimum number of edge additions. Here, the label sequence of a vertex is the sequence of labels of edges incident to it. The contributions of this paper are two fold: We provide a framework to show hardness results for different variants of social network anonymization using a common approach. We start by showing that k-label sequence anonymity of arbitrary labeled graphs is hard, and use this result to prove NP-hardness results for many other recently proposed notions of graph anonymization. Secondly, we present interesting algorithms and hardness for bipartite graphs. For unlabeled bipartite graphs, we show k-degree anonymity is in P for all k ≥ 2. For labeled bipartite graphs, we show that k-label sequence anonymity is in P for k = 2 but it is NP-hard for k ≥ 3.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".