MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360994195 · doi:10.1109/tc.2023.3236868

Tensor Recurrent Neural Network With Differential Privacy

2023· article· en· W4360994195 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Feng, Laurence T. Yang, Bocheng Ren, Deqing Zou, Mianxiong Dong, Shunli Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computers · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersScience and Technology Program of Guizhou ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDifferential privacyRecurrent neural networkComputer scienceDeep learningArtificial intelligenceTensor (intrinsic definition)Machine learningArtificial neural networkData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recurrent neural network (RNN), a branch of deep learning, is a powerful model for sequential data that has outstanding performance on a wide range of important Internet of Things (IoT) tasks. This unprecedented growth of RNN model has however encountered both heterogeneous IoT data and privacy issues. Existing RNN model can not deal with heterogeneous sequential data; often the larger datasets used in training of RNN model contain sensitive information. To tackle these challenges and for the first time, this research proposes a novel differentially private tensor-based RNN (DPTRNN) that can be applied in many challenging deep learning sequence tasks for IoT systems. Specifically, to process heterogeneous sequential data, we propose a tensor-based RNN model. To guarantee privacy, we develop a tensor-based back-propagation through time algorithm with perturbation to avoid exposing the sensitive information for training the tensor-based RNN model within the framework of differential privacy. Thorough security analysis shows that the differential private tensor-based RNN efficiently protects the confidentiality of sensitive user information for IoT. Our results from extensive experiments on two challenging large video datasets suggest that our proposed scheme is practical with guarantee of data privacy preservation and acceptable accuracy loss.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations64
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on ComputersSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207