MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Hybrid Machine Learning and GenAI Approach for Data Loss Prevention

2025· article· W7127987698 on OpenAlexaff
Amine Messaoud Nacer, Bassant Selim, Ali Azouz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpam and Phishing Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParaphraseClassifier (UML)Baseline (sea)Machine translationPipeline (software)Ensemble learningDecision treeConfusion matrix

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data leakage prevention (DLP) has become a critical requirement for organizations seeking to protect sensitive information in increasingly distributed and data-driven environments. Traditional rule-based DLP methods are brittle under paraphrase and format drift, while supervised approaches are hindered by the scarcity and cost of high-quality labeled data. This paper presents a hybrid pipeline that combines large language model-assisted labeling with a lightweight gradientboosted classifier for detecting confidential content in organizational textual communications. Using the publicly available U.S. Department of State email corpus, GPT-4 Turbo generated initial automated labels, which were validated on a manually reviewed sample before training. The resulting model, based on Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency (TF-IDF) features and XGBoost, achieved state-of-the-art performance compared to other ensemble and baseline classifiers, with $\mathbf{F}_{1}$-score of $\mathbf{7 6. 9 \%}$ and accuracy of 77%. These results demonstrate that large language models can effectively bootstrap high-quality annotations for sensitive content, enabling robust and interpretable DLP systems deployable in real-world contexts.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
GenreMethods

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 topicSpam and Phishing DetectionFrench-language works237,207