Reconstruction Privacy: Enabling Statistical Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-independent reasoning (NIR) allows the information about one record in the data to be learnt from the information of other records in the data. Most posterior/prior based privacy criteria consider NIR as a privacy violation and require to smooth the distribution of published data to avoid sensitive NIR. The drawback of this approach is that it limits the utility of learning statistical relationships. The differential privacy criterion considers NIR as a non-privacy violation, therefore, enables learning statistical relationships, but at the cost of potential disclosures through NIR. A question is whether it is possible to (1) allow learning statistical relationships, yet (2) prevent sensitive NIR about an individual. We present a data perturbation and sampling method to achieve both (1) and (2). The enabling mechanism is a new privacy criterion that distinguishes the two types of NIR in (1) and (2) with the help of the law of large numbers. In particular, the record sampling effectively prevents the sensitive disclosure in (2) while having less effect on the statistical learning in (1).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.013 | 0.061 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; 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".