MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045753458 · doi:10.1111/insr.12391

A Survey of Differentially Private Regression for Clinical and Epidemiological Research

2020· article· en· W3045753458 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Ficek, Wei Wang, Henian Chen, Getachew Dagne, Ellen M. Daley

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Statistical Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDifferential privacyStatistical inferenceInferenceData scienceEpidemiologyRelevance (law)Regression analysisAnalyticsComputer scienceCausal inferenceData miningEconometricsMedicineStatisticsMathematicsMachine learningArtificial intelligencePathologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Differential privacy is a framework for data analysis that provides rigorous privacy protections for database participants. It has increasingly been accepted as the gold standard for privacy in the analytics industry, yet there are few techniques suitable for statistical inference in the health sciences. This is notably the case for regression, one of the most widely used modelling tools in clinical and epidemiological studies. This paper provides an overview of differential privacy and surveys the literature on differentially private regression, highlighting the techniques that hold the most relevance for statistical inference as practiced in clinical and epidemiological research. Research gaps and opportunities for further inquiry are identified.

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.095
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.095
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.503
GPT teacher head0.545
Teacher spread0.041 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Statistical ReviewSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207