Anonymisation, Deanonymisation and Data Management

Speaker: Dr Kieron O'Hara Organiser: Time: 04/02/2015 11:00-11:45 Location: B32/3077 Abstract In order to reap the potential societal benefits of big and broad data, it is essential to share and link personal data. However, privacy and data protection considerations mean that, to be shared, personal data must be anonymised, so that the data subject cannot be identified from the data. Anonymisation is therefore a vital tool for data sharing, but deanonymisation, or reidentification, is always possible given sufficient auxiliary information (and as the amount of data grows, both in terms of creation, and in terms of availability in the public domain, the probability of finding such auxiliary information grows). This creates issues for the management of anonymisation, which are exacerbated not only by uncertainties about the future, but also by misunderstandings about the process(es) of anonymisation. This talk discusses these issues in relation to privacy, risk management and security, reports on recent theoretical tools created by the UKAN network of statistics professionals (on which the author is one of the leads), and asks how long anonymisation can remain a useful tool, and what might replace it.

Hierarchical Prediction Machines and Big Data Analytics

An emerging consensus in cognitive science views the biological brain as a hierarchically-organized predictive processing system. This is a system in which higher-order regions are continuously attempting to predict the activity of lower-order regions at a variety of (increasingly abstract) spatial and temporal scales. The brain is thus revealed as a hierarchical prediction machine that is constantly engaged in the effort to predict the flow of information originating from the sensory surfaces. Such a view seems to afford a great deal of explanatory leverage when it comes to a broad swathe of seemingly disparate psychological phenomena (e.g., learning, memory, perception, action, emotion, planning, reason, imagination, and conscious experience). In the most positive case, the predictive processing story seems to provide our first glimpse at what a unified (computationally-tractable and neurobiological plausible) account of human psychology might look like. This obviously marks out one reason why such models should be the focus of current empirical and theoretical attention. Another reason, however, is rooted in the potential of such models to advance the current state-of-the-art in machine intelligence and machine learning. Interestingly, the vision of the brain as a hierarchical prediction machine is one that establishes contact with work that goes under the heading of 'deep learning'. Deep learning systems thus often attempt to make use of predictive processing schemes and (increasingly abstract) generative models as a means of supporting the analysis of large data sets. But are such computational systems sufficient (by themselves) to provide a route to general human-level analytic capabilities? I will argue that they are not and that closer attention to a broader range of forces and factors (many of which are not confined to the neural realm) may be required to understand what it is that gives human cognition its distinctive (and largely unique) flavour. The vision that emerges is one of 'homomimetic deep learning systems', systems that situate a hierarchically-organized predictive processing core within a larger nexus of developmental, behavioural, symbolic, technological and social influences. Relative to that vision, I suggest that we should see the Web as a form of 'cognitive ecology', one that is as much involved with the transformation of machine intelligence as it is with the progressive reshaping of our own cognitive capabilities.