Personalized Anonymization for Set-Valued Data by Partial Suppression.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Set-valued data is comprised of records that are sets of items, such as goods purchased by each individual. Methods of publishing and widely utilizing set-valued data while protecting personal information have been extensively studied in the field of privacy-preserving data publishing. Until now, basic models such as k-anonymity or km-anonymity could not cope with attribute inference by an adversary with background knowledge of the records. On the other hand, the ρ-uncertainty model makes it possible to prevent attribute inference with a confidence value above a certain level in set-valued data. However, even in that case, there is the problem that items to be protected have to be designated in advance. In this research, we propose a new model that can provide more suitable privacy protection for each individual by protecting different items designated for each record distinctively and build a heuristic algorithm to achieve this guarantee using partial suppression. In addition, considering the problem that the computational complexity of the algorithm increases combinatorially with increasing data size, we introduce the concept of probabilistic relaxation of privacy guarantee. Finally, we show the experimental results of evaluating the performance of the algorithms using real-world datasets.
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 | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; 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".