MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283775510 · doi:10.1145/3477531

Accountable Private Set Cardinality for Distributed Measurement

2022· article· en· W4283775510 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Privacy and Security · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCorrectnessSet operationsComputer securityBloom filterSet (abstract data type)AnonymityOverhead (engineering)AdversaryCardinality (data modeling)Distributed computingTheoretical computer scienceComputer networkAlgorithmData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce cryptographic protocols for securely and efficiently computing the cardinality of set union and set intersection. Our private set-cardinality protocols ( PSC ) are designed for the setting in which a large set of parties in a distributed system makes observations, and a small set of parties with more resources and higher reliability aggregates the observations. PSC allows for secure and useful statistics gathering in privacy-preserving distributed systems. For example, it allows operators of anonymity networks such as Tor to securely answer the questions: How many unique users are using the network? and How many hidden services are being accessed? We prove the correctness and security of PSC in the Universal Composability framework against an active adversary that compromises all but one of the aggregating parties. Although successful output cannot be guaranteed in this setting, PSC either succeeds or terminates with an abort, and we furthermore make the adversary accountable for causing an abort by blaming at least one malicious party. We also show that PSC prevents adaptive corruption of the data parties from revealing past observations, which prevents them from being victims of targeted compromise, and we ensure safe measurements by making outputs differentially private. We present a proof-of-concept implementation of PSC and use it to demonstrate that PSC operates with low computational overhead and reasonable bandwidth. It can count tens of thousands of unique observations from tens to hundreds of data-collecting parties while completing within hours. PSC is thus suitable for daily measurements in a distributed system.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.225 · 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