Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep learning sits at the forefront of many on-going advances in a variety of learning tasks. Despite its supremacy in accuracy under benign environments, Deep learning suffers from adversarial vulnerability and privacy leakage (e.g., sensitive attribute inference) in adversarial environments. Also, many deep learning systems exhibit discriminatory behaviors against certain groups of subjects (e.g., demographic disparity). In this paper, we propose a unified information-theoretic framework to defend against sensitive attribute inference and mitigate demographic disparity in deep learning for the model partitioning scenario, by minimizing two mutual information terms. We prove that as one mutual information term decreases, an upper bound on the chance for any adversary to infer the sensitive attribute from model representations will decrease. Also, the extent of demographic disparity is bounded by the other mutual information term. Since direct optimization on the mutual information is intractable, we also propose a tractable Gaussian mixture based method and a gumbel-softmax trick based method for estimating the two mutual information terms. Extensive evaluations in a variety of application domains, including computer vision and natural language processing, demonstrate our framework's overall better performance than the existing baselines.
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 | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.283 | 0.174 |
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".