Achieving Data Privacy through Secrecy Views and Null-Based Virtual Updates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There may be sensitive information in a relational database, and we might want to keep it hidden from a user or group thereof. In this work, sensitive data is characterized as the contents of a set of secrecy views. For a user without permission to access that sensitive data, the database instance he queries is updated to make the contents of the views empty or contain only tuples with null values. In particular, if this user poses a query about any of these views, no meaningful information is returned. Since the database is not expected to be physically changed to produce this result, the updates are only virtual. And also minimal in a precise way. These minimal updates are reflected in the secrecy view contents, and also in the fact that query answers, while being privacy preserving, are also maximally informative. Virtual updates are based on the use of null values as used in the SQL standard. We provide the semantics of secrecy views and the virtual updates. The different ways in which the underlying database is virtually updated are specified as the models of a logic program with stable model semantics. The program becomes the basis for the computation of the "secret answers" to queries, i.e. those that do not reveal the sensitive information.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".