EPSet: Efficient and Privacy-Preserving Set Similarity Range Query Over Encrypted Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Set similarity query is a fundamental query type in various applications, such as clinical diagnosis, online shopping, and mobile crowdsensing. Meanwhile, as the prevalence of outsourced query services, privacy-preserving set similarity query has been considerablely studied. However, to the best of our knowledge, most previously reported solutions suffer from applicability, efficiency, or security issues. Aiming at addressing these issues, we propose an efficient and privacy-preserving set similarity range query scheme (EPSet), where Jaccard similarity is employed as the similarity metric. Specifically, the set similarity range query is first transformed into multi-dimensional range queries by leveraging the triangle inequality of Jaccard distance. Then, a pivot-based k-d tree is designed for indexing the dataset and processing the set similarity query. After that, we design homomorphic encryption based privacy-preserving filter/refinement protocols, respectively named as PPF and PPR, to protect set similarity query privacy, and propose our EPSet scheme. The security of our scheme is proved under the simulation-based real/ideal model, and the performance is validated thorugh the extensive experiment evaluation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".