MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393184599 · doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2024.3380596

Fuzzy Prediction Model in Privacy Protection: Takagi–Sugeno Rules Model via Differential Privacy

2024· article· en· W4393184599 on OpenAlexaff
Ge Zhang, Xiubin Zhu, Li Yin, Witold Pedrycz, Zhiwu Li

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDifferential privacyPrivacy protectionComputer scienceInformation privacyFuzzy logicFuzzy setComputer securityData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rule–based fuzzy models have modular architectures and come with well-developed design methodologies such that they can build accurate models with good interpretabilities in system modeling. However, a large amount of private data needs to be used for statistical analysis and forecasting in rule–based fuzzy models. The purpose of this study is to build an intelligent model with high accuracy and versatility under the premise of data privacy and model security. To mitigate the risk of malicious attacks on privacy data during the analysis process, we have employed highly regarded differential privacy techniques to devise a novel rule-based fuzzy modeling approach. We propose a function approximation mechanism to reconstruct the objective function and add a perturbation mechanism to the objective function in Takagi-Sugeno rules model. Taking into account the delicate balance between data privacy and utility, we have innovatively introduced a Takagi-Sugeno rule-based model based on differential privacy. This model is applicable to both linear and nonlinear systems, offering protection to sensitive data privacy and model security within the system. We investigate the relationship between the interpretability of the model and the degree of privacy protection. By constructing a reasonable rule base, we achieve higher accuracy than other system modeling methods based on differential privacy. This paper compares the influence of the number of rules on differential privacy, and considers the algorithm performance under various noise distributions. It is shown that the Takagi-Sugeno rules model based on differential privacy has a strong ability to predict and analyze data.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0100.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.261
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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