Achieving Efficient and Privacy-Preserving Cross-Domain Big Data Deduplication in Cloud
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Secure data deduplication can significantly reduce the communication and storage overheads in cloud storage services, and has potential applications in our big data-driven society. Existing data deduplication schemes are generally designed to either resist brute-force attacks or ensure the efficiency and data availability, but not both conditions. We are also not aware of any existing scheme that achieves accountability, in the sense of reducing duplicate information disclosure (e.g., to determine whether plaintexts of two encrypted messages are identical). In this paper, we investigate a three-tier cross-domain architecture, and propose an efficient and privacy-preserving big data deduplication in cloud storage (hereafter referred to as EPCDD). EPCDD achieves both privacy-preserving and data availability, and resists brute-force attacks. In addition, we take accountability into consideration to offer better privacy assurances than existing schemes. We then demonstrate that EPCDD outperforms existing competing schemes, in terms of computation, communication and storage overheads. In addition, the time complexity of duplicate search in EPCDD is logarithmic.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".