MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124300031 · doi:10.1109/tsmcb.2009.2024949

On Utilizing Association and Interaction Concepts for Enhancing Microaggregation in Secure Statistical Databases

2009· article· en· W2124300031 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAssociation (psychology)DatabaseComputer scienceAssociation rule learningInformation retrievalData miningPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a possibly pioneering endeavor to tackle the Microaggregation Techniques (MATs) in secure statistical databases by resorting to the principles of associative neural networks (NNs). The prior art has improved the available solutions to the MAT by incorporating proximity information, and this approach is done by recursively reducing the size of the data set by excluding points that are farthest from the centroid and points that are closest to these farthest points. Thus, although the method is extremely effective, arguably, it uses only the proximity information while ignoring the mutual interaction between the records. In this paper, we argue that interrecord relationships can be quantified in terms of the following two entities: 1) their "association" and 2) their "interaction." This case means that records that are not necessarily close to each other may still be "grouped," because their mutual interaction, which is quantified by invoking transitive-closure-like operations on the latter entity, could be significant, as suggested by the theoretically sound principles of NNs. By repeatedly invoking the interrecord associations and interactions, the records are grouped into sizes of cardinality " k," where k is the security parameter in the algorithm. Our experimental results, which are done on artificial data and benchmark real-life data sets, demonstrate that the newly proposed method is superior to the state of the art not only based on the Information Loss (IL) perspective but also when it concerns a criterion that involves a combination of the IL and the Disclosure Risk (DR).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it