Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Privacy and Bias Analysis of Disclosure Avoidance Systems

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2301.12204 v1 pith:7B54QR2X submitted 2023-01-28 cs.CR cs.AIcs.MA

classification cs.CRcs.AIcs.MA
keywords privacydifferentialmechanismsaccuracyanalysisavoidancebiasdata
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Disclosure avoidance (DA) systems are used to safeguard the confidentiality of data while allowing it to be analyzed and disseminated for analytic purposes. These methods, e.g., cell suppression, swapping, and k-anonymity, are commonly applied and may have significant societal and economic implications. However, a formal analysis of their privacy and bias guarantees has been lacking. This paper presents a framework that addresses this gap: it proposes differentially private versions of these mechanisms and derives their privacy bounds. In addition, the paper compares their performance with traditional differential privacy mechanisms in terms of accuracy and fairness on US Census data release and classification tasks. The results show that, contrary to popular beliefs, traditional differential privacy techniques may be superior in terms of accuracy and fairness to differential private counterparts of widely used DA mechanisms.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. How Context Attribution Handles What the Model Already Knows

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Context attribution methods cannot disentangle in-context from in-weight knowledge and assign unfaithful scores under overlap; new metrics and WMDP-Cyber++ quantify the failure.

Pith tools