Improving the Consistency of the Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA) Documents in Semiconductor Manufacturing

Digitalization of causal domain knowledge is crucial. Especially since the inclusion of causal domain knowledge in the data analysis processes helps to avoid biased results. To extract such knowledge, the Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA) documents represent a valuable data source. Originally, FMEA documents were designed to be exclusively produced and interpreted by human domain experts. As a consequence, these documents often suffer from data consistency issues. This paper argues that due to the transitive perception of the causal relations, discordant and merged information cases are likely to occur. Thus, we propose to improve the consistency of FMEA documents as a step towards more efficient use of causal domain knowledge. In contrast to other work, this paper focuses on the consistency of causal relations expressed in the FMEA documents. To this end, based on an explicit scheme of types of inconsistencies derived from the causal perspective, novel methods to enhance the data quality in FMEA documents are presented. Data quality improvement will significantly improve downstream tasks, such as root cause analysis and automatic process control

Deriving Public Transportation Timetables with Large-Scale Cell Phone Data

AbstractIn this paper, we propose an approach to deriving public transportation timetables of a region (i.e. country) based on (i) large- scale, non-GPS cell phone data and (ii) a dataset containing geographic information of public transportation stations. The presented algorithm is designed to work with movements data, which are scarce and have a low spatial accuracy but exists in vast amounts (large-scale). Since only aggregated statistics are used, our algorithm copes well with anonymized data. Our evaluation shows that 89% of the departure times of popular train connections are correctly recalled with an allowed deviation of 5minutes. The timetable can be used as feature for transportation mode detection to separate public from private transport when no public timetable is available

Recent Advances of Differential Privacy in Centralized Deep Learning: A Systematic Survey

Differential Privacy has become a widely popular method for data protection in machine learning, especially since it allows formulating strict mathematical privacy guarantees. This survey provides an overview of the state-of-the-art of differentially private centralized deep learning, thorough analyses of recent advances and open problems, as well as a discussion of potential future developments in the field. Based on a systematic literature review, the following topics are addressed: auditing and evaluation methods for private models, improvements of privacy-utility trade-offs, protection against a broad range of threats and attacks, differentially private generative models, and emerging application domains.Comment: 35 pages, 2 figure

How to keep text private? A systematic review of deep learning methods for privacy-preserving natural language processing

Deep learning (DL) models for natural language processing (NLP) tasks often handle private data, demanding protection against breaches and disclosures. Data protection laws, such as the European Union\u27s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), thereby enforce the need for privacy. Although many privacy-preserving NLP methods have been proposed in recent years, no categories to organize them have been introduced yet, making it hard to follow the progress of the literature. To close this gap, this article systematically reviews over sixty DL methods for privacy-preserving NLP published between 2016 and 2020, covering theoretical foundations, privacy-enhancing technologies, and analysis of their suitability for real-world scenarios. First, we introduce a novel taxonomy for classifying the existing methods into three categories: data safeguarding methods, trusted methods, and verification methods. Second, we present an extensive summary of privacy threats, datasets for applications, and metrics for privacy evaluation. Third, throughout the review, we describe privacy issues in the NLP pipeline in a holistic view. Further, we discuss open challenges in privacy-preserving NLP regarding data traceability, computation overhead, dataset size, the prevalence of human biases in embeddings, and the privacy-utility tradeoff. Finally, this review presents future research directions to guide successive research and development of privacy-preserving NLP models