MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410475038 · doi:10.56553/popets-2025-0110

WaKA: Data Attribution using K-Nearest Neighbors and Membership Privacy Principles

2025· article· en· W4410475038 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Mesana, Clément Bénesse, Hadrien Lautraite, Gilles Caporossi, Sébastien Gambs

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
Keywordsk-nearest neighbors algorithmAttributionComputer scienceInternet privacyAuthorship attributionData miningPsychologyArtificial intelligenceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we introduce WaKA (Wasserstein K-nearest neighbors Attribution), a novel attribution method that leverages principles from the LiRA (Likelihood Ratio Attack) framework and k-nearest neighbors classifiers (k-NN). WaKA efficiently measures the contribution of individual data points to the model’s loss distribution, analyzing every possible k-NN that can be constructed using the training set, without requiring to sample subsets of the training set. WaKA is versatile and can be used a posteriori as a membership inference attack (MIA) to assess privacy risks or a priori for privacy influence measurement and data valuation. Thus, WaKA can be seen as bridging the gap between data attribution and membership inference attack (MIA) by providing a unified framework to distinguish between a data point’s value and its privacy risk. For instance, we have shown that self-attribution values are more strongly correlated with the attack success rate than the contribution of a point to the model generalization. WaKA’s different usages were also evaluated across diverse real-world datasets, demonstrating performance very close to LiRA when used as an MIA on k-NN classifiers, but with greater computational efficiency. Additionally, WaKA shows greater robustness than Shapley Values for data minimization tasks (removal or addition) on imbalanced datasets.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0480.223
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.231 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings on Privacy Enhancing TechnologiesSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207