MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7162196990 · doi:10.65521/ijeecs.v14i2.2138

A Comprehensive Review of Secure Aggregation of Environmental Data via Error-Bounded Encoding: Security Models, Optimization Techniques, and Emerging Computing Applications

2025· article· W7162196990 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel J. Williams, Mikhail Ivanov, Carlos Ferreira

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Electrical Electronics and Computer Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData aggregatorScalabilityEdge computingRobustness (evolution)Wireless sensor networkEncryptionHomomorphic encryptionCryptographyKey (lock)Data security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid expansion of environmental monitoring systems, driven by the widespread adoption of Internet of Things devices and wireless sensor networks, has resulted in the generation of large volumes of distributed data. Ensuring secure aggregation of this data is essential for maintaining confidentiality, integrity, and efficiency in applications such as climate monitoring, smart agriculture, disaster management, and smart cities. Due to the resource-constrained nature of sensor devices and communication limitations, lightweight and privacy-preserving aggregation techniques are required. Secure aggregation protocols enable the computation of aggregate functions, such as sum and average, without exposing individual data values. Recent advancements have introduced error-bounded encoding techniques that allow approximate data representation within controlled error limits, reducing communication overhead while preserving analytical accuracy. This review examines secure aggregation methods incorporating such encoding strategies, including cryptographic approaches, coding-theoretic methods, federated learning-based techniques, and hybrid frameworks integrating edge computing and blockchain. While homomorphic encryption and secret sharing provide strong privacy guarantees, they often incur high computational costs, whereas encoding-based methods improve efficiency with minimal accuracy loss. Key challenges include balancing accuracy and efficiency, ensuring robustness against adversarial threats, and enabling real-time processing, highlighting the need for scalable and intelligent aggregation solutions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 venueInternational Journal of Electrical Electronics and Computer SystemsSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207