Privacy Drift: Evolving Privacy Concerns in Incremental Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the evolving landscape of machine learning (ML), Federated Learning (FL) presents a paradigm shift towards decentralized model training while preserving user data privacy. This paper introduces the concept of ``privacy drift", an innovative framework that parallels the well-known phenomenon of concept drift. While concept drift addresses the variability in model accuracy over time due to changes in the data, privacy drift encapsulates the variation in the leakage of private information as models undergo incremental training. By defining and examining privacy drift, this study aims to unveil the nuanced relationship between the evolution of model performance and the integrity of data privacy. Through rigorous experimentation, we investigate the dynamics of privacy drift in FL systems, focusing on how model updates and data distribution shifts influence the susceptibility of models to privacy attacks, such as membership inference attacks (MIA). Our results highlight a complex interplay between model accuracy and privacy safeguards, revealing that enhancements in model performance can lead to increased privacy risks. We provide empirical evidence from experiments on customized datasets derived from CIFAR-100 (Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, 100 classes), showcasing the impact of data and concept drift on privacy. This work lays the groundwork for future research on privacy-aware machine learning, aiming to achieve a delicate balance between model accuracy and data privacy in decentralized environments.
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 | 0.027 | 0.121 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| 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".