Efficient Privacy-Preserving Multi-Location Task Allocation in Fog-Assisted Vehicular Crowdsourcing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multi-location task allocation is one of the most crucial issues in vehicular crowdsourcing (VCS). To ensure service quality, the VCS service provider prefers to assign multi-location tasks to the workers whose future trajectories have high spatial proximity with the task locations. However, this process requires workers and task owners to upload their precise locations to a not-fully-trusted service provider, thereby raising location privacy concerns. Although several privacy-preserving trajectory similarity evaluation schemes have been proposed, they either fail to match the multi-location task allocation scenario, or incur nontrivial computational costs due to homomorphic encryption. To address these challenges, we propose a novel efficient privacy-preserving multi-location task allocation scheme in fog-assisted VCS. Specifically, we design a lightweight secure Euclidean distance computation protocol based on arithmetic secret sharing (ASS), which can compute Euclidean distance without revealing the two input locations. Then, based on this protocol, we build our scheme that supports multi-location task allocation based on Hausdorff semi-distance (HSD). Our security analysis demonstrates the location privacy preservation of our scheme, and the experiment results on a real dataset also validate the efficiency of our scheme.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".