A Generic Framework for Privacy Risk Assessment of Machine Learning Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Privacy attacks on machine learning (ML) models pose significant risks to individuals whose personal data is used for training or querying these models. Although concerns about the potential exposure of sensitive information through ML models continue to grow, existing safeguard mechanisms primarily focus on security threats, often neglecting privacy risks. In this paper, we examine existing tools to assess privacy risks of ML models and provide an overview of various privacy attacks and defense strategies. Given the lack of a comprehensive framework for assessing privacy vulnerabilities, we propose a generic framework for evaluating the privacy of ML systems and establish a set of tailored evaluation metrics for different types of privacy attacks. In addition, we develop a dedicated testbed to implement our framework and present experimental results that demonstrate the impact of various privacy attacks on different ML models.
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 | 0.025 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".