↓ Skip to main content

Evolutionary approach to violating group anonymity using third-party data

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
Title
Evolutionary approach to violating group anonymity using third-party data
Published in
SpringerPlus, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-1692-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dan Tavrov, Oleg Chertov

Abstract

In the era of Big Data, it is almost impossible to completely restrict access to primary non-aggregated statistical data. However, risk of violating privacy of individual respondents and groups of respondents by analyzing primary data has not been reduced. There is a need in developing subtler methods of data protection to come to grips with these challenges. In some cases, individual and group privacy can be easily violated, because the primary data contain attributes that uniquely identify individuals and groups thereof. Removing such attributes from the dataset is a crude solution and does not guarantee complete privacy. In the field of providing individual data anonymity, this problem has been widely recognized, and various methods have been proposed to solve it. In the current work, we demonstrate that it is possible to violate group anonymity as well, even if those attributes that uniquely identify the group are removed. As it turns out, it is possible to use third-party data to build a fuzzy model of a group. Typically, such a model comes in a form of a set of fuzzy rules, which can be used to determine membership grades of respondents in the group with a level of certainty sufficient to violate group anonymity. In the work, we introduce an evolutionary computing based method to build such a model. We also discuss a memetic approach to protecting the data from group anonymity violation in this case.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 18%
Researcher 2 18%
Lecturer 1 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 3 27%
Computer Science 2 18%
Decision Sciences 1 9%
Engineering 1 9%
Unknown 4 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 August 2016.
All research outputs
#20,337,788
of 22,883,326 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,461
of 1,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#333,657
of 396,837 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#150
of 217 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,883,326 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,851 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 396,837 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 217 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.