Document Title |
ENG |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report of the Work Session |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Document templates and examples in Word and TEX (updated 26/09/2007) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Information Notice No. 2 - Local arrangements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceedings of the Work Session (8MB) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provisional agenda and timetable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Community Innovation Survey: Comparable Dissemination (Italy), Invited paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Microdata Sharing Via Pseudonymization (University of Malaga, Radboud University Nijmegen, PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory), Invited paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secret Sharing vs. Encryption-Based Techniques for Privacy-Preserving Data Mining (Sabanci University, Turkey), Invited paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerical Data Masking Techniques for Maintaining Sub-Domain Characteristics, Invited paper (University of Kentucky, Oklahoma State University), Invited paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evaluating the Disclosure Risks of Reporting Quality Measures to the Public (Duke University, National Institute of Statistical Sciences), Invited paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On method-specific record linkage for risk assessment (IIIA-CSIC, Spain), Invited paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Microaggregation Heuristics for P-sensitive K-anonymity (Rovira I Virgili University, Catalonia, Spain), Invited paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The use of protected micro data in tabulation: A case of SDC-methods, microaggregation and PRAM (Statistics Finland), Supporting paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymisation of linked employer employee datasets using the example of the German Structure of Earnings Survey (Statistical Office of Hesse and University of Applied Sciences Mainz, Germany), Supporting paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparing Fully and Partially Synthetic Data Sets for Statistical Disclosure Control in The German IAB Establishment Panel (Institute for Employment Research (IAB), University Bamberg), Supporting paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disclosure scenario and risk assessment: structure of earnings survey (Istat, Italy), Supporting paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Microdata risk assessment in an NSI context (ONS, United Kingdom), Supporting paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Using Targeted Perturbation of Microdata to Protect Against Intelligent Linkage (University of Manchester), Supporting paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(ii) Tabular data protection |
|
|
Presentation by the Discussant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Implementations of Noise for Tabular Magnitude Data, Synthetic Tabular Frequency and Microdata, and a Remote Microdata Analysis System (United States Census Bureau), Invited paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An examination of two methods for controlled tabular adjustment of tabular data that preserve data quality (National Center for Health Statistics, United States of America), Invited paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comparative Evaluation of Four Different Sensitive Tabular Data Protection Methods Using a Real Life Table Structure of Complex Hierarchies and Links (United States Department of Energy), Invited paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assessing the impact of SDC methods on census frequency tables (University of Southampton, United Kingdom), Invited paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Differentially private marginals release with mutual consistency and error independent of sample size (Microsoft Research), Invited paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A measure of disclosure risk for aggregate data (University of Manchester), Invited paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cell suppression in a special class of linked tables (Statistics Netherlands), Supporting paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Census tables: utility and safety via a cell threshold (Statistics New Zealand), Supporting paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Improving Researcher Access to USDA’s Agricultural Resource Management Survey (United States Department of Agriculture), Supporting paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Integer rounding versus continuous adjustment for tabular data (University of La Laguna, Spain), Supporting paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|