The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Private and Utility Enhanced Recommendations With Local Differential Privacy and Gaussian Mixture Model
Open accessAbstract
Recommendation systems rely heavily on behavioural and preferential data (e.g., ratings and likes) of a user to produce accurate recommendations. However, such unethical data aggregation and analytical practices of Service Providers (SP) causes privacy concerns among users. Local differential privacy (LDP) based perturbation mechanisms address this concern by adding noise to users’ data at the user-side before sending it to the SP. The SP then uses the perturbed data to perform recommendations. Although LDP protects the privacy of users from SP, it causes a substantial decline in recommendation accuracy. We propose an LDP-based Matrix Factorization (MF) with a Gaussian Mixture Model (MoG) to address this problem. The LDP perturbation mechanism, i.e., Bounded Laplace (BLP), regulates the effect of noise by confining the perturbed ratings to a predetermined domain. We derive a sufficient condition of the scale parameter for BLP to satisfy$\varepsilon$-LDP. We use the MoG model at the SP to estimate the noise added locally to the ratings and the MF algorithm to predict missing ratings. Our LDP based recommendation system improves the predictive accuracy without violating LDP principles. We demonstrate that our method offers a substantial increase in recommendation accuracy under a strong privacy guarantee through empirical evaluations on three real-world datasets, i.e., Movielens, Libimseti and Jester.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The collaborative filtering-based recommender system approach can be problematic in terms of fairness and privacy.
“However, this approach can be problematic in terms of fairness and privacy [13-15, 18, 19].”
From A Deep Dive into Fairness, Bias, Threats, and Privacy in Recommender Systems: Insights and Future Research (2024) · cites this paper as [14]
Various privacy preservation methodologies, such as randomization, differential privacy, secure multiparty computation, and homomorphic encryption, can be applied to build decentralized PPRS.
“To address these vulnerabilities, various privacy preservation methodologies, such as randomization, differential privacy, secure multiparty computation, and homomorphic encryption, can be applied to build decentralized PPRS [14, 129-132, 138, 139, 141].”
From A Deep Dive into Fairness, Bias, Threats, and Privacy in Recommender Systems: Insights and Future Research (2024) · cites this paper as [14]
DP noise can be introduced at various stages: on the input data, the model parameters, or the final recommendations.
“This carefully calibrated noise can be introduced at various stages: on the input data [14, 124, 138, 172], the model parameters [101, 171, 173], or the final recommendations [172].”
From A Deep Dive into Fairness, Bias, Threats, and Privacy in Recommender Systems: Insights and Future Research (2024) · cites this paper as [14]
Laplace, Gaussian, and Exponential mechanisms are commonly applied for noise addition to satisfy DP.
“Usually, Laplace [14, 15, 171, 172, 176, 177], Gaussian [101, 123, 125] & Exponential [126] mechanisms are commonly applied for noise addition to satisfy the DP.”
From A Deep Dive into Fairness, Bias, Threats, and Privacy in Recommender Systems: Insights and Future Research (2024) · cites this paper as [14]
Citations
Cites
RAPPOR: Randomized Aggregatable Privacy-Preserving Ordinal Response
Erlingsson, Ú., Pihur, V., & Korolova, A. (2014) · Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security · doi:10.1145/2660267.2660348 · Cited by 1,838
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 38
- 10.1109/SP.2008.33 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/1557019.1557090 · DOI
- 10.1109/ASONAM.2013.6785787 · DOI
- 10.1109/TKDE.2018.2805356 · DOI
- Hua, Differentially private matrix factorization, 1763
- 10.1145/2792838.2800173 · DOI
- 10.1609/aaai.v32i1.11714 · DOI
- 10.1109/FOCS.2008.27 · DOI
- 10.1109/TKDE.2018.2845388 · DOI
- 10.1145/2020408.2020426 · DOI
- 10.1145/2365952.2365972 · DOI
- 10.1109/CVPR.1991.139758 · DOI
- 10.1109/ICCV.2013.169 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11263-007-0099-z · DOI
- 10.1111/j.2517–6161.1977.tb01600.x · DOI · Paper page
- de la Torre, 2003, A framework for robust subspace learning, Int. J. Comput. Vis., 54, 1
- 10.1109/CVPR.2005.118 · DOI
- Srebro, Weighted low-rank approximations, 720
- 10.1145/2827872 · DOI
- Goldberg, 2001, Eigentaste: A constant time collaborative filtering algorithm, ” Inf. Retrieval J., 4, 133, 10.1023/A:1011419012209 · DOI
- Brozovsky, Recommender system for online dating service, 1
- Goldberg, 2001, Eigentaste: A constant time collaborative filtering algorithm, Inf. Retrieval J., 4, 133, 10.1023/A:1011419012209 · DOI
- Wang, Using randomized response for differential privacy preserving data collection, 1
- 10.29012/jpc.715 · DOI
- Cadwalladr, 2018, Revealed: 50 million Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge analytica in major data breach. The Guardian
- 10.1504/IJICS.2008.016819 · DOI
- 10.47893/ijcct.2013.1201 · DOI
- 10.1561/0400000042 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/2792838.2800191 · DOI
- Kairouz, 2014, Extremal mechanisms for local differential privacy, CoRR, abs/1407.1338 · arXiv
- 10.1109/ICDM.2014.140 · DOI
- 10.1142/S0219622010003919 · DOI
- Bassily, Practical locally private heavy hitters, 2285
- 10.1145/2976749.2978409 · DOI
- Wang, Locally differentially private protocols for frequency estimation, 729
- 10.1145/3243734.3243742 · DOI
- 10.1109/MIS.2020.3017205 · DOI
- 10.1109/MIS.2020.3014880 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Roy, F., Ding, X., Choo, K. K. R., & Zhou, P. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.12651 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Neera, J., Chen, X., Aslam, N., Wang, K., & Shu, Z.
- Affiliations
- Northumbria University (GB)
- University of Alberta (CA)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering
- Published
- 2023-04-01
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 4151-4163
- ISSN
- 1041-4347 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-2191
- 2326-3865
- OpenAlex
- W3134271114
- Cited by
- 42
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 5
- FWCI
- 1.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering (publishedVersion)
- CentAUR (University of Reading) (acceptedVersion)
- Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) (acceptedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Brunel University Research Archive (BURA) (Brunel University London) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
- Keywords
- local differential privacy, recommender systems, matrix factorization, Gaussian mixture model, privacy-preserving recommendation, missing rating prediction, noise estimation, privacy-utility trade-off
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review