Towards Integrated Spatial Crowdsourcing: Online Privacy-Preserving Selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study an intriguing and practical scenario of online Spatial Crowdsourcing (SC), in which workers have the flexibility to perform tasks using various methods, such as walking, driving, or utilizing remote aerial vehicles (RAVs). This results in workers having heterogeneous, arbitrary, and non-stationary utilities over time. We refer to this scenario as integrated SC. Unfortunately, existing studies are limited in addressing integrated SC settings due to two aspects: (1) these studies are based on the assumption that workers’ utilities are independently and identically distributed and follow a stationary distribution like Gaussian, which does not hold in integrated SC; (2) their approaches fail to provide personalized privacy preservation for different workers. Motivated by these limitations, we closely investigate the heterogeneous utility and personalized privacy requirement in integrated SC and propose an Online Personalized Privacy-preserving Selection framework (OPPS). In this framework, we present an online selection policy that balances the exploration-exploitation trade-off given heterogeneous utilities and develop a built-in privacy policy that ensures differential privacy guarantee. We then demonstrate that our framework effectively addresses the trade-off by deriving a sublinear, privacy-related upper bound on regret that scales as$O(\sqrt{T})$. Extensive numerical simulations based on real-world drone datasets are conducted to validate the effectiveness of our framework compared with state-of-the-art approaches.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".