MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200077820 · doi:10.3233/jifs-219262

Deep active reinforcement learning for privacy preserve data mining in 5G environments

2021· article· en· W4200077820 on OpenAlexaff
Usman Ahmed, Jerry Chun‐Wei Lin, Gautam Srivastava, Hsing‐Chung Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePoolingHeuristicsReinforcement learningData miningEntropy (arrow of time)Transaction dataArtificial intelligenceMachine learningInformation sensitivityDatabase transactionComputer securityDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frequent pattern mining (FIM) identifies the most important patterns in data sets. However, due to the huge and high-dimensional nature of transactional data, classical pattern mining techniques suffer from the limitations of dimensions and data annotations. Recently, data mining while preserving privacy is considered as an important research area. Information privacy is a tradeoff that must be considered when using data. Through many years, privacy-preserving data mining (PPDM) made use of methods that are mostly based on heuristics. The operation of deletion was used to hide the sensitive information in PPDM. In this study, we used deep active learning to protect private and sensitive information. This paper combines entropy-based active learning with an attention-based approach to effectively hide sensitive patterns. The constructed models are then validated using high-dimensional transactional data with attention-based and active learning methods in a reinforcement environment. The results show that the proposed model can support and improve the effectiveness of decision-making by increasing the number of training instances through the use of a pooling technique and an entropy uncertainty measure. The proposed paradigm can achieve data sanitization by the hiding sensitive items and avoiding to hide the non-sensitive items. The model outperforms greedy, genetic, and particle swarm optimization approaches.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intelligent & Fuzzy SystemsSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207