MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293203739 · doi:10.1111/exsy.13131

<scp>ShareChain</scp>: Blockchain‐enabled model for sharing patient data using federated learning and differential privacy

2022· article· en· W4293203739 on OpenAlexaff
Laraib Javed, Adeel Anjum, Bello Musa Yakubu, Majid Iqbal, Syed Atif Moqurrab, Gautam Srivastava

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBlockchainDifferential privacyData sharingComputer securityComputer networkData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Every individual in our technologically evolved world needs proper data security. The procedure of exchanging medical information is increasingly concerned with data privacy. Many techniques have been offered for preserving data security. These techniques use approaches such as ‐anonymity, ‐diversity, and others. However, such solutions are vulnerable to attribute disclosure, homogeneity, and background knowledge risks due to their syntactic nature. In this work, we describe a safe and secure architecture and semantic approach for data sharing that is based on blockchain, local differential privacy (LDP), and federated learning (FL). The proposed framework generates an atmosphere devoid of trust in which data owners are no longer required to have trust in the controllers. The FL models enable the whole network to decentralize its data‐driven learning. Interplanetary file system (IPFS) is used to provide data security in a distributed environment because each file in IPFS has a digital fingerprint that is computed using a cryptographic hash function on the file's whole contents. Due to the rigorous privacy guarantee, data owners no longer need to be worried about the security of their data. The proposed model's assessment parameters include latency, throughput, privacy, and accuracy. The data privacy of the proposed model is protected via LDP and FL, and its latency and throughput communication transactions on permissioned blockchain are calculated and compared with those of the benchmark model. The findings indicate that the proposed model delivers 85% more accurate privacy than the benchmark model.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations44
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert SystemsSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207