MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414271167 · doi:10.1109/tifs.2025.3611115

Optimized Sparse Vector Aggregation Under Local Differential Privacy

2025· article· en· W4414271167 on OpenAlexaff
Ellen Z. Zhang, Yunguo Guan, Rongxing Lu, Harry Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDifferential privacyByteScheme (mathematics)Dimension (graph theory)CrowdsourcingSet (abstract data type)Information privacyCover (algebra)Differential (mechanical device)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In crowdsourcing applications, gathering and analyzing users’ strong positive (1) or negative (-1) reactions to a large number of items is crucial for improving service quality, particularly in recommendation systems. However, protecting users’ privacy while handling diverse sparse patterns in contexts with a large dimension sizedposes significant challenges for efficient and privacy-preserving data aggregation. To address these challenges, in this paper, we propose an optimizedk-sparse vector mean estimation scheme under Local Differential Privacy (LDP), ensuring that each user’s entire set of up tokprivate values from {−1, 1} satisfies ε-LDP. Specifically, our proposed scheme employs a seed mining technique in conjunction with PRNG Randomizer, which allows users to send their data only once while enabling the server to accurately estimate any value’s mean in the domain. Our scheme achieves an asymptotically optimal error ofO( 1/ε√n), equivalent to that of a 1-sparse case, while also ensuring efficient communication costs. The communication cost remains at a minimal level ofO(1) (only 2 bytes per user’s report) for smallerkvalues and scales toO(k) for largerk, due to efficient binning strategies. Extensive experimental results confirm that our results align with theoretical expectations, demonstrating that our scheme not only preserves user privacy but also ensures higher accuracy compared to other schemes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and SecuritySame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207