docs/anonymization_report.md

Anonymization and sensitive-content report

This release is de-anonymized on purpose: the paper is accepted, so author names, affiliations, and a contact email appear in README.md, NOTICE, CITATION.cff, and registry/release_manifest.json. That is intended, not an anonymization failure.

What this report covers is everything that should not be here.

Scan performed

A recursive case-insensitive grep across every staged file, for:

• absolute local filesystem path prefixes (user home directories)
• absolute cluster filesystem path prefixes (the project's scratch and campaign-storage roots)
• API-key prefixes, bearer-token headers, and credential-style key names
• private-key PEM headers
• served inference endpoint hostnames and URLs
• scheduler job scripts, job identifiers, and queue names
• the author's username as a bare string

This document deliberately does not reproduce those patterns literally. A report that quotes the strings it forbids will match its own scan, which makes the scan result unreadable and tempts a maintainer to add a file exclusion. The scan itself lives in the validation script, where the patterns belong.

Result

Clean. No local or cluster filesystem paths, no credentials, no endpoint URLs, no scheduler artifacts, and no internal run logs appear in any staged file.

The author's username appears only as part of the intended contact email address, in exactly four files: README.md, NOTICE, CITATION.cff, and registry/release_manifest.json. Every occurrence was checked individually and every one is that email address.

The scan was verified to be capable of failing: a canary string in the shape of each forbidden pattern was planted in a temporary copy of the tree and the scanner flagged every one. A scan that has only ever run on clean data detects nothing known.

Specific things that were stripped or never staged

• Endpoint URLs. The source run_metadata.json files record the served inference endpoint. Those files were not staged; the confidence-probe table was rebuilt column by column and the endpoint field was dropped. The model identifier (openai/gpt-oss-120b) is retained because it is scientific metadata, not infrastructure.
• Absolute paths. Source manifests (run_manifest.json, diagnostics.json, confidence_probe_staging_index.csv) embed cluster and local paths. None of those files were staged. Where a number from them was needed, only the number was carried across.
• Scheduler artifacts. Job scripts, job identifiers, and run logs exist in the source tree. None staged.
• Reviewer and post-review discussion. The source tree contains reviewer response plans, strategy notes, and OpenReview drafts. None staged.
• Raw model responses. The confidence-probe source table has a raw_response column of model-generated text. Dropped. Only the parsed integer probability, the parse status, and token counts are released.
• Model rationale text. The probe's free-text reason column was dropped; it is model-generated and not needed for scoring.
• Serialized models and feature builders. Not staged.

Residual identifiability

Problem identifiers are stable and derived from upstream benchmarks, so they are not a privacy concern. The benchmarks contain no personal data: competition math problems, entrance-exam questions, textbook problems, and biology protocol questions.

No human-subject data, no user data, and no personally identifying information about third parties appears in any released table.