Privacy-aware guessing efficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate the problem of guessing a discrete random variable Y under a privacy constraint dictated by another correlated discrete random variable X, where both guessing efficiency and privacy are assessed in terms of the probability of correct guessing. We define h(PXY,ε) as the maximum probability of correctly guessing Y given an auxiliary random variable Z, where the maximization is taken over all PZ|Yensuring that the probability of correctly guessing X given Z does not exceed ε. We show that the map ε → h(PXY,ε) is strictly increasing, concave, and piecewise linear, which allows us to derive a closed form expression for h(PxY,ε) when X and Y are connected via a binary-input binary-output channel. For {(Xi, Yi)}ni=1being pairs of independent and identically distributed binary random vectors, we similarly define h_n(PX n Y n, ε) under the assumption that Znis also a binary vector. Then we obtain a closed form expression for h_n(PX n Y n, ε) for sufficiently large, but nontrivial values of ε.
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 | 0.020 | 0.104 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".