MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2599292739 · doi:10.1145/3029806.3029827

Graph Automorphism-Based, Semantics-Preserving Security for the Resource Description Framework (RDF)

2017· article· en· W2599292739 on OpenAlexafffund
Zhiyuan Lin, Mahesh Tripunitara

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAccess Control and Trust
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRDFComputer scienceRDF/XMLSPARQLTheoretical computer scienceRDF SchemaLinked dataCwmSemantic WebInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We address security in the context of the Resource Description Framework (RDF), a graph-like data model for the web. One of RDF's compelling features is a precise, model-theoretic semantics. We first propose a threat model, and under it, observe that the technical challenge is really in hiding information that may be revealed by the structure of an RDF graph. We choose two quantitative, unconditional notions for securing graph-structure from the literature that address the threat model, and adapt them for RDF. We then consider the problem of devising algorithms for achieving a certain level of security while preserving the semantics of the input RDF graph. We observe that there are operations we can perform on an RDF graph that both provide such security and preserve semantics. We observe, further, that there is a natural way to quantify information-loss under these operations, and that there appears to be a natural trade-off between security and information-quality. We study this trade-off and establish fundamental results. We show that the RDF graphs that result from applying the operations induce a lattice that leads to a natural quantification of information-quality. We show also that achieving a certain level of security while retaining a certain level of information-quality is NP-complete under polynomial-time Turing reductions. Finally, towards an empirical assessment, we discuss our design and implementation of a reduction to CNF-SAT, and empirical results for two classes of RDF graphs. In summary, our work makes fundamental and practical contributions to semantics-preserving security for RDF.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAccess Control and TrustFrench-language works237,207