← Graph

Does randomizing structural fields break analytics?

question 2 connections

Audience asks how often modifying structural attributes (e.g. randomizing counts) becomes a problem for downstream data analysis. Sergyenko: the obfuscation is mostly static — done once, maintained via deltas, not re-randomized on every run — so outlier masking is a one-time effect. Analytics at a high/'helicopter' level (e.g. 40–50% fewer therapy sessions in December due to holidays) stays accurate; precision only degrades for very fine-grained reports, and you shouldn't blindly rely on the exact quality of obfuscated data for fine-grained analytics.

answer_summary
Obfuscation is applied once and maintained via deltas, so structural perturbations are static. High-level trend analytics remain accurate; fine-grained analytics on obfuscated data shouldn't be trusted.
question Does randomizing structural fields break analytics?
about
About how obfuscation interacts with downstream analytics.
question Does randomizing structural fields break analytics?
asked_at
Asked during Q&A.

Provenance

Read by
3 extractions