MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2607608011 · doi:10.1109/iciht.2017.7899007

Privacy-preserving querying mechanism on privately encrypted personal health records

2017· article· en· W2607608011 on OpenAlexaff
Feras Aljumah, Makan Pourzandi, Mourad Debbabi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEncryptionInternet privacyComputer scienceMechanism (biology)Computer securityInformation privacyCryptographyPersonally identifiable information

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The affordability of cloud data storage has made it simpler for users to store and access data online from any location or operating system. These services may be used by users to store sensitive data, such as personal health records or financial data. Many service providers offer features such as analyzing the users’ private data to generate useful reports for medical data. Storing such sensitive data on the cloud raises many privacy concerns. While encryption can ensure data confidentiality, it introduces the challenge of analyzing the privately encrypted data while preserving the privacy of the users and the querying entity. In this paper, we address this problem by proposing a network protocol that would allow a third party, such as a health organization, to query privately encrypted data without relying on a trusted entity. The protocol we propose preserves the privacy of the users and the querying entity. The protocol relies on homomorphic, threshold cryptography, and randomization to allow for secure, distributed, and privacy-preserving queries. We evaluate the performance of our protocol and report on the results of the implementation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.009
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryptography and Data SecurityFrench-language works237,207