ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2026
Is a Win-Win possible? Achieving pareto-optimal privacy-utility balance in fine-tuned genome language model embeddings against embedding reconstruction attacks.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationGenomic data is among the most sensitive categories of personal information, and the growing adoption of language models for sequence analysis raises significant privacy concerns. Prior work demonstrated that embeddings from general-purpose language models adapted for genomic sequences leak substantial single-nucleotide information under reconstruction attacks, and that fine-tuning embeddings can reduce this vulnerability at certain positions. However, three critical questions remain unaddressed: (i) whether privacy-utility tradeoffs are inherent constraints or configuration-dependent phenomena; (ii) whether genomic-specialized models such as DNABERT-base and Nucleotide Transformer exhibit different vulnerabilities than adapted general-purpose models; and (iii) how to statistically validate whether observed privacy improvements represent meaningful gains. Addressing these gaps is essential for guiding model selection in privacy-sensitive genomic applications.
resultsWe systematically evaluated 13 transformer architectures, 9 general-purpose and 4 genomic-specialized, under position-specific embedding reconstruction attacks. We assessed the vulnerabilities of both pre-trained and fine-tuned models to the single-nucleotide inference-reconstruction attack using our new metrics, including error-based privacy gain and Pareto dominance scores, and statistically validated the results via paired t-tests. XLNet-Large achieved the best observed privacy protection among all evaluated models (+19.5% mean privacy gain) while maintaining competitive prediction performance. General-purpose models outperformed genomic-specialized models in 56% of pairwise comparisons. Tokenization strategy, rather than domain specialization, emerged as the primary determinant of the privacy-utility balance. These findings provide evidence-based guidance for selecting models in privacy-sensitive short-window genomic applications. All privacy claims in this work are specific to position-wise embedding reconstruction attacks and do not extend to other privacy risks, such as membership inference or training data extraction, which may respond differently to fine-tuning. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The code is publicly available at https://github.com/AnonymousISCBConf/Win-Win-Privacy-Utility-Analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.