Security and Privacy in Shared HitLCPS Using a GA-Based Multiple-Threshold Sanitization Model
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 Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), especially in human-in-the-loop situations (also known as HitLCPS), the security and privacy for keeping sensitive information private is considered an emerging topic in recent decades. Many techniques in privacy-preserving data mining (PPDM) can be applied directly to HitLCPS. However, most of them to date have focused on handling singular threshold problems for data sanitization. If a sensitive itemset includes more items, it has a higher probability of being identified due to its specificity. In this work, we propose a new concept of multiple support thresholds to assist in resolving this issue. The proposed method assigns a stricter threshold for an itemset. Furthermore, a genetic-algorithm (GA)-based model is involved in the designed algorithm to minimize side effects. In our experimental results, the GA-based PPDM approach is compared with traditional Greedy PPDM approaches. The strong experimental results clearly show that our proposed method can give similar performance to conventional algorithms while still maintaining higher-levels of security and privacy protection than previous methods.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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