MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Privacy-Preserving Data Mining on the Web

2008· book-chapter· en· W4238000466 on OpenAlexaff
Stanley Robson de Medeiros Oliveira, Osmar R. Zai͏̈ane

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2008
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInformation privacyPersonally identifiable informationInformation sensitivityPoint (geometry)Face (sociological concept)Private information retrievalPrivacy policyPrivacy by DesignData scienceInternet privacyData miningComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Privacy-preserving data mining (PPDM) is one of the newest trends in privacy and security research. It is driven by one of the major policy issues of the information era—the right to privacy. This chapter describes the foundations for further research in PPDM on the Web. In particular, we describe the problems we face in defining what information is private in data mining. We then describe the basis of PPDM including the historical roots, a discussion on how privacy can be violated in data mining, and the definition of privacy preservation in data mining based on users’ personal information and information concerning their collective activities. Subsequently, we introduce a taxonomy of the existing PPDM techniques and a discussion on how these techniques are applicable to Web-based applications. Finally, we suggest some privacy requirements that are related to industrial initiatives and point to some technical challenges as future research trends in PPDM on the Web.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207