MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953150142 · doi:10.1109/tase.2019.2917136

Optimal Information Release for Mixed Opacity in Discrete-Event Systems

2019· article· en· W2953150142 on OpenAlexafffund
Behnam Behinaein, Feng Lin, Karen Rudie

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPetri Nets in System Modeling
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOpacitySecrecyEvent (particle physics)Computer scienceProperty (philosophy)Theoretical computer scienceAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceComputer securityPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Opacity is a property of a system that captures whether certain event sequences (or certain states) are indistinguishable from other event sequences (or states) in the system. Opacity is used in analyzing privacy, secrecy, and other aspects of systems modeled by discrete-event systems. In this paper, we introduce the concept of minimal information release policies for non-opacity and the concept of mixed opacity. Mixed opacity policies are introduced as a holistic approach for solving problems that involve a combination of releasing information to make some objectives of the system opaque while making some other objectives non-opaque. We present a set of algorithms for information release under a mixed opacity policy. These algorithms compute policies in a system such that two given sublanguages are opaque, and at the same time, two other sublanguages in the same system are non-opaque. The application of mixed opacity is demonstrated on the Dining Cryptographers Problem.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations29
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automation Science and EngineeringSame topicPetri Nets in System ModelingFrench-language works237,207