$\alpha$ - Mutual Information: A Tunable Privacy Measure for Privacy Protection in Data Sharing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper adopts Arimoto's$\alpha$-Mutual Information as a tunable privacy measure, in a privacy-preserving data release setting that aims to prevent disclosing private data to adversaries. By fine-tuning the privacy metric, we demonstrate that our approach yields superior models that effectively thwart attackers across various performance dimensions. We formulate a general distortion-based mechanism that manipulates the original data to offer privacy protection. The distortion metrics are determined according to the data structure of a specific experiment. We confront the problem expressed in the formulation by employing a general adversarial deep learning framework that consists of a releaser and an adversary, trained with opposite goals. This study conducts empirical experiments on images and time-series data to verify the functionality of$\alpha$-Mutual Information. We evaluate the privacy-utility trade-off of customized models and compare them to mutual information as the baseline measure. Finally, we analyze the consequence of an attacker's access to side information about private data and witness that adapting the privacy measure results in a more refined model than the state-of-the-art in terms of resiliency against side information.
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 | 0.020 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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".