Publishing set-valued data via differential privacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Set-valued data provides enormous opportunities for various data mining tasks. In this paper, we study the problem of publishing set-valued data for data mining tasks under the rigorous differential privacy model. All existing data publishing methods for set-valued data are based on partition-based privacy models, for example k -anonymity, which are vulnerable to privacy attacks based on background knowledge. In contrast, differential privacy provides strong privacy guarantees independent of an adversary's background knowledge and computational power. Existing data publishing approaches for differential privacy, however, are not adequate in terms of both utility and scalability in the context of set-valued data due to its high dimensionality. We demonstrate that set-valued data could be efficiently released under differential privacy with guaranteed utility with the help of context-free taxonomy trees. We propose a probabilistic top-down partitioning algorithm to generate a differentially private release, which scales linearly with the input data size. We also discuss the applicability of our idea to the context of relational data. We prove that our result is (∈, δ)-useful for the class of counting queries, the foundation of many data mining tasks. We show that our approach maintains high utility for counting queries and frequent itemset mining and scales to large datasets through extensive experiments on real-life set-valued datasets.
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 | 0.016 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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".