Robust Utility-Preserving Text Anonymization Based on Large Language Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anonymizing text that contains sensitive information is crucial for a wide range of applications. Existing techniques face the emerging challenges of the re-identification ability of large language models (LLMs), which have shown advanced capability in memorizing detailed information and reasoning over dispersed pieces of patterns to draw conclusions. When defending against LLM-based re-identification, anonymization could jeopardize the utility of the resulting anonymized data in downstream tasks. In general, the interaction between anonymization and data utility requires a deeper understanding within the context of LLMs. In this paper, we propose a framework composed of three key LLM-based components: $\textit{a privacy evaluator}$, $\textit{a utility evaluator}$ and $\textit{an optimization component}$, which work collaboratively to perform anonymization. Extensive experiments demonstrate that the proposed model outperforms existing baselines, showing robustness in reducing the risk of re-identification while preserving greater data utility in downstream tasks. We provide detailed studies on these core modules. To consider large-scale and real-time applications, we investigate the distillation of the anonymization capabilities into lightweight models. All of our code and datasets will be made publicly available at $\texttt{[Github URL]}$.
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 | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".