MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407066964 · doi:10.2196/70100

Data Obfuscation Through Latent Space Projection for Privacy-Preserving AI Governance: Case Studies in Medical Diagnosis and Finance Fraud Detection

2025· article· en· W4407066964 on OpenAlex
Mahesh Vaijainthymala Krishnamoorthy

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIRx Med · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObfuscationPreprintCorporate governanceSpace (punctuation)Computer securityInternet privacyProjection (relational algebra)BusinessComputer scienceFinanceWorld Wide WebAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The increasing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) systems into critical societal sectors has created an urgent demand for robust privacy-preserving methods. Traditional approaches such as differential privacy and homomorphic encryption often struggle to maintain an effective balance between protecting sensitive information and preserving data utility for AI applications. This challenge has become particularly acute as organizations must comply with evolving AI governance frameworks while maintaining the effectiveness of their AI systems. Objective: This paper aims to introduce and validate data obfuscation through latent space projection (LSP), a novel privacy-preserving technique designed to enhance AI governance and ensure responsible AI compliance. The primary goal is to develop a method that can effectively protect sensitive data while maintaining essential features necessary for AI model training and inference, thereby addressing the limitations of existing privacy-preserving approaches. Methods: We developed LSP using a combination of advanced machine learning techniques, specifically leveraging autoencoder architectures and adversarial training. The method projects sensitive data into a lower-dimensional latent space, where it separates sensitive from nonsensitive information. This separation enables precise control over privacy-utility trade-offs. We validated LSP through comprehensive experiments on benchmark datasets and implemented 2 real-world case studies: a health care application focusing on cancer diagnosis and a financial services application analyzing fraud detection. Results: LSP demonstrated superior performance across multiple evaluation metrics. In image classification tasks, the method achieved 98.7% accuracy while maintaining strong privacy protection, providing 97.3% effectiveness against sensitive attribute inference attacks. This performance significantly exceeded that of traditional anonymization and privacy-preserving methods. The real-world case studies further validated LSP's effectiveness, showing robust performance in both health care and financial applications. Additionally, LSP demonstrated strong alignment with global AI governance frameworks, including the General Data Protection Regulation, the California Consumer Privacy Act, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Conclusions: LSP represents a significant advancement in privacy-preserving AI, offering a promising approach to developing AI systems that respect individual privacy while delivering valuable insights. By embedding privacy protection directly within the machine learning pipeline, LSP contributes to key principles of fairness, transparency, and accountability. Future research directions include developing theoretical privacy guarantees, exploring integration with federated learning systems, and enhancing latent space interpretability. These developments position LSP as a crucial tool for advancing ethical AI practices and ensuring responsible technology deployment in privacy-sensitive domains.

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.

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)0.059
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0090.050
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.300 · 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