Location Privacy-Preserving Task Recommendation With Geometric Range Query in Mobile Crowdsensing
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In mobile crowdsensing, location-based task recommendation requires each data requester to submit a task-related geometric range to crowdsensing service providers such that they can match suitable workers within this range. Generally, a trusted server (i.e., database owner) should be deployed to protect location privacy during the process, which is not desirable in practice. In this paper, we propose the location privacy-preserving task recommendation (PPTR) schemes with geometric range query in mobile crowdsensing without the trusted database owner. Specifically, we first propose a PPTR scheme with linear search complexity, named PPTR-L, based on a two-server model. By leveraging techniques of polynomial fitting and randomizable matrix multiplication, PPTR-L enables the service provider to find the workers located in the data requester’s arbitrary geometric query range without disclosing the sensitive location privacy. To further improve query efficiency, we design a novel data structure for task recommendation and propose PPTR-F to achieve faster-than-linear search complexity. Through security analysis, it is shown that our schemes can protect the confidentiality of workers’ locations and data requesters’ queries. Extensive experiments are performed to demonstrate that our schemes can achieve high computational efficiency in terms of geometric range query.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it