Online Algorithm for Differentially Private Genome-wide Association Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Digitization of healthcare records contributed to a large volume of functional scientific data that can help researchers to understand the behaviour of many diseases. However, the privacy implications of this data, particularly genomics data, have surfaced recently as the collection, dissemination, and analysis of human genomics data is highly sensitive. There have been multiple privacy attacks relying on the uniqueness of the human genome that reveals a participant or a certain group’s presence in a dataset. Therefore, the current data sharing policies have ruled out any public dissemination and adopted precautionary measures prior to genomics data release, which hinders timely scientific innovation. In this article, we investigate an approach that only releases the statistics from genomic data rather than the whole dataset and propose a generalized Differentially Private mechanism for Genome-wide Association Studies (GWAS). Our method provides a quantifiable privacy guarantee that adds noise to the intermediate outputs but ensures satisfactory accuracy of the private results. Furthermore, the proposed method offers multiple adjustable parameters that the data owners can set based on the optimal privacy requirements. These variables are presented as equalizers that balance between the privacy and utility of the GWAS. The method also incorporates Online Bin Packing technique [1], which further bounds the privacy loss linearly, growing according to the number of open bins and scales with the incoming queries. Finally, we implemented and benchmarked our approach using seven different GWAS studies to test the performance of the proposed methods. The experimental results demonstrate that for 1,000 arbitrary online queries, our algorithms are more than 80% accurate with reasonable privacy loss and exceed the state-of-the-art approaches on multiple studies (i.e., EigenStrat, LMM, TDT).
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 | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".