Daily activity locations k-anonymity for the evaluation of disclosure risk of individual GPS datasets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Personal privacy is a significant concern in the era of big data. In the field of health geography, personal health data are collected with geographic location information which may increase disclosure risk and threaten personal geoprivacy. Geomasking is used to protect individuals' geoprivacy by masking the geographic location information, and spatial k-anonymity is widely used to measure the disclosure risk after geomasking is applied. With the emergence of individual GPS trajectory datasets that contains large volumes of confidential geospatial information, disclosure risk can no longer be comprehensively assessed by the spatial k-anonymity method. METHODS: This study proposes and develops daily activity locations (DAL) k-anonymity as a new method for evaluating the disclosure risk of GPS data. Instead of calculating disclosure risk based on only one geographic location (e.g., home) of an individual, the new DAL k-anonymity is a composite evaluation of disclosure risk based on all activity locations of an individual and the time he/she spends at each location abstracted from GPS datasets. With a simulated individual GPS dataset, we present case studies of applying DAL k-anonymity in various scenarios to investigate its performance. The results of applying DAL k-anonymity are also compared with those obtained with spatial k-anonymity under these scenarios. RESULTS: The results of this study indicate that DAL k-anonymity provides a better estimation of the disclosure risk than does spatial k-anonymity. In various case-study scenarios of individual GPS data, DAL k-anonymity provides a more effective method for evaluating the disclosure risk by considering the probability of re-identifying an individual's home and all the other daily activity locations. CONCLUSIONS: This new method provides a quantitative means for understanding the disclosure risk of sharing or publishing GPS data. It also helps shed new light on the development of new geomasking methods for GPS datasets. Ultimately, the findings of this study will help to protect individual geoprivacy while benefiting the research community by promoting and facilitating geospatial data sharing.
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 | 0.016 | 0.067 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".