MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Platial k-Anonymity: Improving Location Anonymity Through Temporal Popularity Signatures

2023· article· en· W6929138079 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnonymityPopularitySet (abstract data type)Location dataField (mathematics)Spatial analysisLocation-based servicek-anonymity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While it is increasingly necessary in today’s digital society, sharing personal location information comes at a cost. Sharing one’s precise place of interest, e.g., Compass Coffee, enables a range of location-based services, but substantially reduces the individual’s privacy. Methods have been developed to obfuscate and anonymize location data while still maintaining a degree of utility. One such approach, spatial k-anonymity, aims to ensure an individual’s level of anonymity by reporting their location as a set of k potential locations rather than their actual location alone. Larger values of k increase spatial anonymity while decreasing the utility of the location information. Typical examples of spatial k-anonymized datasets present elements as simple geographic points with no attributes or contextual information. In this work, we demonstrate that the addition of publicly available contextual data can significantly reduce the anonymity of a k-anonymized dataset. Through the analysis of place type temporal visitation patterns, hours of operation, and popularity values, one’s anonymity can be decreased by more than 50 percent. We propose a platial k-anonymity approach that leverages a combination of temporal popularity signatures and reports the amount that k must increase in order to maintain a certain level of anonymity. Finally, a method for reporting platial k-anonymous regions is presented and the implications of our methods are discussed.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.012
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics)Same topicStatistical Methods and Bayesian InferenceFrench-language works237,207