Bibliographic record
Abstract
Location-based services are one of the fastest growing technologies. Millions of users are using these services and sharing their locations using their smart devices. The popularity of using such applications, while enabling others to access user’s location, brings with it many privacy issues. The user has the ability to set his location privacy preferences manually. Many users face difficulties in order to set their preferences in the proper way. One solution is to use machine learning based methods to predict location privacy preferences automatically. These models suffer from degraded performance when there is no sufficient training data. Another solution is to make the decision for the intended user, depending on the collected opinions from similar users. <em>User-User Collaborative Filtering (CF)</em> is an example within this category. In this paper, we will introduce an improved machine learning based predictor. The results show significant improvements in the performance. The accuracy was improved from 75.30% up to 84.82%, while the privacy leak was reduced from 11.75% up to 7.65%. We also introduced an integrated model which combines both machine learning based methods and collaborative filtering based methods in order to get the advantages from both of them.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".