Statistical Disclosure Control and Developments in Formal Privacy: In Memoriam to Chris Skinner
Bibliographic record
Abstract
I provide an overview of the evolution of Statistical Disclosure Control (SDC) research over the last decades and how it has evolved to handle the data revolution with more formal definitions of privacy. I emphasize the many contributions by Chris Skinner in the research areas of SDC. I review his seminal research, starting in the 1990’s with his work on the release of UK Census sample microdata. This led to a wide-range of research on measuring the risk of re-identification in survey microdata through probabilistic models. I also focus on other aspects of Chris’ research in SDC. Chris was the recipient of the 2019 Waksberg Award and sadly never got a chance to present his Waksberg Lecture at the Statistics Canada International Methodology Symposium. This paper follows the outline that Chris had prepared in preparation for that lecture.
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 | 0.074 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.025 |
| 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".