Minimality Attack in Privacy Preserving Data Publishing
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
Data publishing generates much concern over the protection of individual privacy. Recent studies consider cases where the adversary may possess different kinds of knowledge about the data. In this paper, we show that knowledge of the mechanism or algorithm of anonymization for data publication can also lead to extra information that assists the adversary and jeopardizes individual privacy. In particular, all known mechanisms try to minimize information loss and such an attempt provides a loophole for attacks. We call such an attack a minimality attack. In this paper, we introduce a model called m-confidentiality which deals with minimality attacks, and propose a feasible solution. Our experiments show that minimality attacks are practical concerns on real datasets and that our algorithm can prevent such attacks with very little overhead and information loss.
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 | 0.002 | 0.039 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.138 | 0.442 |
| 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