Enabling Strong Privacy Preservation and Accurate Task Allocation for Mobile Crowdsensing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mobile crowdsensing engages a crowd of individuals to use their mobile devices to cooperatively collect data about social events and phenomena for customers with common interest. It can reduce the cost on sensor deployment and improve data quality with human intelligence. To enhance data trustworthiness, it is critical for the service provider to recruit mobile users based on their personal features, e.g., mobility pattern and reputation, but it leads to the privacy leakage of mobile users. Therefore, how to resolve the contradiction between user privacy and task allocation is challenging in mobile crowdsensing. In this paper, we propose SPOON, a strong privacy-preserving mobile crowdsensing scheme supporting accurate task allocation based on geographic information and credit points of mobile users. In SPOON, the service provider enables to recruit mobile users based on their locations, and select proper sensing reports according to their trust levels without invading user privacy. By utilizing proxy re-encryption and BBS+ signature, sensing tasks are protected and reports are anonymized to prevent privacy leakage. In addition, a privacy-preserving credit management mechanism is introduced to achieve decentralized trust management and secure credit proof for mobile users. Finally, we show the security properties of SPOON and demonstrate its efficiency in terms of computation and communication.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it