A measure of disclosure risk for microdata

163 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A Framework for Evaluating the Utility of Data Altered to Protect Confidentiality (2006, background): “…has been much work on developing measures of disclosure risk (e.g., Duncan and Lambert 1986, 1989; Lambert 1993; Fienberg, Makov, and Sanil 1997; Skinner and Elliot 2002; Reiter 2005a), there has been comparatively little work on developing measures of data utility, and so this article outlines…”
Estimating Risks of Identification Disclosure in Microdata (2005, unknown): “…(Paass 1988; Blien, Wirth, and Muller 1992; Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology 1994; Yancey, Winkler, and Creecy 2002) or indirect matching using the existing database (Spruill 1982; Duncan and Lambert 1986, 1989; Lambert 1993; Fienberg, Makov, and Sanil 1997; Skinner and Elliot 2002).”
Assessing global disclosure risk in masked microdata (2004, background): “One of the most intuitive ways to measure disclosure risk for microdata is to count the number of unique records with respect to a limited set of attributes [39].”
Notes on the occupancy problem with infinitely many boxes: general asymptotics and power laws ∗ (2007, background): “Such species sampling problems arise in ecology, to be sure, but also in database query optimization, where the sampling units may be entries in columns of a database while the species consist of all of distinct values appearing in the column [9]; in literature, where the sampling units may be words”