MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012333974 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2020.2980777

DAPA: A Decentralized, Accountable, and Privacy-Preserving Architecture for Car Sharing Services

2020· article· en· W3012333974 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer securityAccountabilityServerSingle point of failureService providerComputer scienceVerifiable secret sharingInformation privacyService (business)Secret sharingInternet privacyCryptographyComputer networkBusinessLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Car sharing offers a flexible peer-to-peer or station based car rental service to customers. On one hand, it requires customers to expose identifications (e.g., valid driving licenses) to car sharing service providers (CSSPs) for accountability, i.e., the driving qualification of customers can be verified and misbehaving customers can be traced by CSSPs. On the other hand, privacy concerns arise when customers identities are exposed as honest-but-curious CSSPs may secretly extract customers privacy information by linking their car rental records to their identities. To resolve this contradiction, we propose a decentralized, accountable, and privacy-preserving architecture for car sharing services, named DAPA. In specific, to overcome the limitation of the single point of failure, multiple dynamic validation servers are employed to substitute a single trusted third-party authority and assist in building decentralized trust for customers. In addition, to protect customers' privacy and achieve accountability simultaneously under the decentralized architecture, a new privacy-preserving identity management (PPIM) scheme is introduced as a basic module for DAPA. Customers' identities are protected in a distributed and dynamic manner but publicly verified based on a well-designed zero-knowledge proof protocol. Only the misbehaving customers' identities can be recovered by a majority of validation servers using adaptive verifiable secret sharing/redistribution techniques. Detailed security analysis shows that DAPA can minimize privacy breaches and guarantee the accountability. Performance evaluations via extensive simulations demonstrate that DAPA is efficient in terms of computational costs and communication overheads.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.812

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.223 · 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