MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386399481 · doi:10.29012/jpc.808

Private Boosted Decision Trees via Smooth Re-Weighting

2023· article· en· W4386399481 on OpenAlex
Mohammadmahdi Jahanara, Vahid R. Asadi, Marco Carmosino, Akbar Rafiey, Bahar Salamatian

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

VenueJournal of Privacy and Confidentiality · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDifferential privacyBoosting (machine learning)Decision treeComputer scienceWeightingMachine learningArtificial intelligenceGradient boostingEnsemble learningPrivacy protectionID3 algorithmAlternating decision treeDecision tree learningData miningIncremental decision treeComputer securityRandom forest

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Protecting the privacy of people whose data is used by machine learning algorithms is important. Differential Privacy is the appropriate mathematical framework for formal guarantees of privacy, and boosted decision trees are a popular machine learning technique. So we propose and test a practical algorithm for boosting decision trees that guarantees differential privacy. Privacy is enforced because our booster never puts too much weight on any one example; this ensures that each individual's data never influences a single tree "too much." Experiments show that this boosting algorithm can produce better model sparsity and accuracy than other differentially private ensemble classifiers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0140.032
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.266 · 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