Bibliographic record
Abstract
Policy-aware differential privacy (DP) frameworks such as Blowfish privacy enable more accurate query answers than standard DP. In this work, we build the first policy-aware DP system for interactive data exploration, BlowfishDB, that aims to (i) provide bounded and flexible privacy guarantees to the data curators of sensitive data and (ii) support accurate and efficient data exploration by data analysts. However, the specification and processing of customized privacy policies incur additional performance cost, especially for datasets with a large domain. To address this challenge, we propose dynamic Blowfish privacy which allows for the dynamic generation of smaller privacy policies and their data representations at query time. BlowfishDB ensures same levels of accuracy and privacy as one would get working on the static privacy policy. In this demonstration of BlowfishDB, we show how a data curator can fine-tune privacy policies for a sensitive dataset and how a data analyst can retrieve accuracy-bounded query answers efficiently without being a privacy expert.
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 | 0.008 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.005 |
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".