A Privacy-Preserving Method to Optimize Distributed Resource Allocation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider a resource allocation problem involving a large number of agents with individual constraints subject to privacy, and a central operator whose objective is to optimize a global, possibly nonconvex, cost while satisfying the agents' constraints, for instance, an energy operator in charge of the management of energy consumption flexibilities of many individual consumers. We provide a privacy-preserving algorithm that computes the optimal allocation of resources, and in which each agent's private information (constraints and individual solution profile) is never revealed either to the central operator or to a third party. Our method relies on an aggregation procedure: we compute iteratively a global allocation of resources, and gradually ensure existence of a disaggregation, that is, individual profiles satisfying agents' private constraints, by a protocol involving the generation of polyhedral cuts and secure multiparty computations. To obtain these cuts, we use an alternate projection method, which is implemented locally by each agent, preserving her privacy needs. We address especially the case in which the local and global constraints define a transportation polytope. Then, we provide theoretical convergence estimates together with numerical results, showing that the algorithm can be effectively used to solve the allocation problem in high dimension, while addressing privacy issues.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".