Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37749217›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Man vs the machine in the struggle for effective text anonymisation in the age of large language models.

Constantinos Patsakis, Nikolaos Lykousas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Constantinos Patsakis *Department of Informatics, University of Piraeus, 80 Karaoli & Dimitriou str, 18534, Piraeus, Greece. kpatsak@unipi.gr.
Nikolaos Lykousas *Management Systems Institute of Athena Research Centre, Marousi, Greece.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The collection and use of personal data are becoming more common in today's data-driven culture. While there are many advantages to this, including better decision-making and service delivery, it also poses significant ethical issues around confidentiality and privacy. Text anonymisation tries to prune and/or mask identifiable information from a text while keeping the remaining content intact to alleviate privacy concerns. Text anonymisation is especially important in industries like healthcare, law, as well as research, where sensitive and personal information is collected, processed, and exchanged under high legal and ethical standards. Although text anonymisation is widely adopted in practice, it continues to face considerable challenges. The most significant challenge is striking a balance between removing information to protect individuals' privacy while maintaining the text's usability for future purposes. The question is whether these anonymisation methods sufficiently reduce the risk of re-identification, in which an individual can be identified based on the remaining information in the text. In this work, we challenge the effectiveness of these methods and how we perceive identifiers. We assess the efficacy of these methods against the elephant in the room, the use of AI over big data. While most of the research is focused on identifying and removing personal information, there is limited discussion on whether the remaining information is sufficient to deanonymise individuals and, more precisely, who can do it. To this end, we conduct an experiment using GPT over anonymised texts of famous people to determine whether such trained networks can deanonymise them. The latter allows us to revise these methods and introduce a novel methodology that employs Large Language Models to improve the anonymity of texts.

Indexed as

Famous PersonsProboscidea MammalAnimalsBig DataFruitHealth FacilitiesHumansLanguageMale

Identifiers

PMID37749217
PMCPMC10519977

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.