Learning discrete distributions: user vs item-level privacy

July 27, 2020 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐Ÿ› Neural Information Processing Systems

๐Ÿ‘ป CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Yuhan Liu, Ananda Theertha Suresh, Felix Yu, Sanjiv Kumar, Michael Riley arXiv ID 2007.13660 Category cs.LG: Machine Learning Cross-listed cs.CR, cs.DS, cs.IT, stat.ML Citations 58 Venue Neural Information Processing Systems Last Checked 3 months ago
Abstract
Much of the literature on differential privacy focuses on item-level privacy, where loosely speaking, the goal is to provide privacy per item or training example. However, recently many practical applications such as federated learning require preserving privacy for all items of a single user, which is much harder to achieve. Therefore understanding the theoretical limit of user-level privacy becomes crucial. We study the fundamental problem of learning discrete distributions over $k$ symbols with user-level differential privacy. If each user has $m$ samples, we show that straightforward applications of Laplace or Gaussian mechanisms require the number of users to be $\mathcal{O}(k/(mฮฑ^2) + k/ฮตฮฑ)$ to achieve an $\ell_1$ distance of $ฮฑ$ between the true and estimated distributions, with the privacy-induced penalty $k/ฮตฮฑ$ independent of the number of samples per user $m$. Moreover, we show that any mechanism that only operates on the final aggregate counts should require a user complexity of the same order. We then propose a mechanism such that the number of users scales as $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(k/(mฮฑ^2) + k/\sqrt{m}ฮตฮฑ)$ and hence the privacy penalty is $\tildeฮ˜(\sqrt{m})$ times smaller compared to the standard mechanisms in certain settings of interest. We further show that the proposed mechanism is nearly-optimal under certain regimes. We also propose general techniques for obtaining lower bounds on restricted differentially private estimators and a lower bound on the total variation between binomial distributions, both of which might be of independent interest.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Machine Learning

Died the same way โ€” ๐Ÿ‘ป Ghosted