PrivyTo: A privacy‐preserving location‐sharing platform
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
Abstract Concern over the privacy of our personal location is at an all‐time high, yet the desire to share our lives with friends, family, and the public persists. Current methods and applications for sharing location content with the range of people in our lives are sorely lacking. Application users are often limited to sharing a single spatial resolution with all individuals, regardless of relation, and with little control over how this content is shared. Processes for sharing typically involve allowing a for‐profit company access to one’s location before it can be transmitted to the intended recipient. In this work we propose a set of design goals and a design pattern for sharing personal location information that are realized through a prototype mobile web application. Our approach is built on the novel idea of obfuscated and encrypted location views, and promotes a uniquely open method for sharing. The intention of this article is to demonstrate that location sharing need not require one to expose private location information to third parties, and that methods exist to put an individual back in control of their content.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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