MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094549462 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2020.3032896

Privacy-Preserving Multiobjective Sanitization Model in 6G IoT Environments

2020· article· en· W3094549462 on OpenAlexafffund
Jerry Chun‐Wei Lin, Gautam Srivastava, Yuyu Zhang, Youcef Djenouri, Moayad Aloqaily

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceInternet of ThingsComputer securityData modelingDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The next revolution of the smart industry relies on the emergence of the Industrial Internet of Things (IoT) and 5G/6G technology. The properties of such sophisticated communication technologies will change our perspective of information and communication by enabling seamless connectivity and bring closer entities, data, and “things.” Terahertz-based 6G networks promise the best speed and reliability, but they will face new man-in-the-middle attacks. In such critical and high-sensitive environments, the security of data and privacy of information still a big challenge. Without privacy-preserving considerations, the configuration state may be attacked or modified, thus causing security problems and damage to data. In this article, motivated by the need to secure 6G IoT networks, an ant colony optimization (ACO) approach is presented by adopting multiple objectives as well as using transaction deletion to secure confidential and sensitive information. Each ant in the population is represented as a set of possible deletion transactions for hiding sensitive information. We utilize the use of a prelarge concept to assist in the reduction of multiple database scans in the evaluation progress. We then also adopt external solutions to maintain discovered Pareto solutions, thus improving effectiveness to find optimized solutions. Experiments are conducted comparing our methodology to state-of-the-art bioinspired particle swarm optimization (PSO) as well as genetic algorithm (GA). Our strong results clearly show that the designed approach achieves fewer side effects while maintaining low computational cost overall (Chen et al., 2020).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations176
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207