Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37752210›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Human intuition as a defense against attribute inference.

Marcin Waniek, Navya Suri, Abdullah Zameek, Bedoor AlShebli, Talal Rahwan

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Marcin WaniekComputer Science, Science Division, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
Navya Suri *Computer Science, Science Division, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
Abdullah Zameek *Computer Science, Science Division, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
Bedoor AlShebliSocial Science Division, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
Talal RahwanComputer Science, Science Division, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE. talal.rahwan@nyu.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Attribute inference-the process of analyzing publicly available data in order to uncover hidden information-has become a major threat to privacy, given the recent technological leap in machine learning. One way to tackle this threat is to strategically modify one's publicly available data in order to keep one's private information hidden from attribute inference. We evaluate people's ability to perform this task, and compare it against algorithms designed for this purpose. We focus on three attributes: the gender of the author of a piece of text, the country in which a set of photos was taken, and the link missing from a social network. For each of these attributes, we find that people's effectiveness is inferior to that of AI, especially when it comes to hiding the attribute in question. Moreover, when people are asked to modify the publicly available information in order to hide these attributes, they are less likely to make high-impact modifications compared to AI. This suggests that people are unable to recognize the aspects of the data that are critical to an inference algorithm. Taken together, our findings highlight the limitations of relying on human intuition to protect privacy in the age of AI, and emphasize the need for algorithmic support to protect private information from attribute inference.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsIntuitionHumansMachine LearningPrivacy

Identifiers

PMID37752210
PMCPMC10522675

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.