MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410049805 · doi:10.1177/0282423x251329407

Linking Trade Data from Different National Statistical Offices Through a Private Set Intersection

2025· article· en· W4410049805 on OpenAlexaff
Abel Dasylva, Massimo De Cubellis, Fabrizio De Fausti, Loe Franssen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Official Statistics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntersection (aeronautics)Set (abstract data type)Data setStatisticsProbability and statisticsGeographyComputer scienceBusinessMathematicsCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

National Statistical Offices (NSOs) collect extensive data on the international activities of firms within their borders. However, they typically lack information about the foreign partners with whom these firms trade. Linking import data from one NSO to corresponding export data from a partner NSO could significantly enhance statistics on firms’ international operations. While technically feasible, such linkage is legally constrained by strict privacy laws. Private set intersection (PSI) protocols may help address privacy concerns but require unique identifiers to avoid linkage errors. To overcome this limitation, we propose a PSI protocol with three innovations. First, we estimate the rates of linkage error by modeling the number of links from a given record. Second, we adjust an estimated population mean according to the estimated linkage accuracy. Lastly, our adjustment explicitly accounts for this accuracy without assuming a particular relationship among the target variables.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.064
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.165
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0640.165
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.020
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0040.010
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.317
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Official StatisticsSame topicData Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207