2012
DOI: 10.3233/ida-2012-00560
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effective sanitization approaches to hide sensitive utility and frequent itemsets

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Then in Section 4, we propose a new algorithm named HSUFIBL. In this section, by experimental results, we will prove the efficiency of our algorithm and show that it causes lower side effects in comparison to the previous algorithms proposed in [7,12,14]. And the last section is the conclusion.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 74%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Then in Section 4, we propose a new algorithm named HSUFIBL. In this section, by experimental results, we will prove the efficiency of our algorithm and show that it causes lower side effects in comparison to the previous algorithms proposed in [7,12,14]. And the last section is the conclusion.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 74%
“…High utility and frequent itemset hiding algorithm therefore is developed for the sensitive knowledge protection purpose. In 2012, R a j a l a x m i and N a t a r a j a n [14] have proposed two novel algorithms named MSMU and MCRSU. The methodology [14] is to modify the value of data item to reduce both support and utility of the sensitive itemset to less than the minimum support threshold and minimum utility threshold, respectively.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To address the problem of PPUM, Lin et al [20] proposed another three criteria for performance evaluation namely database structure similarity (DSS), database utility similarity (DUS), and itemset utility similarity (IUS). Rajalaxmi and Natarajan also proposed a similar concept namely utility difference [55] with DUS. Details of the related definitions are shown as follows.…”
Section: E Evaluation Criteria For Ppummentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Integer linear programming is adopted in the designed algorithm to obtain a lower ratio of side effects produced in the hiding process. Rajalaxmi and Natarajan [37] proposed two approaches named MSMU and MCRSU to hide the sensitive frequent and utility itemsets. Both algorithms conceal the itemsets until their support and utility fall below the given thresholds, respectively.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%