Recent data search platforms use ML task-based utility measures rather than metadata-based keywords, to search large dataset corpora. Requesters submit a training dataset, and these platforms search for
We present
This content will become publicly available on March 25, 2025
- PAR ID:
- 10514464
- Publisher / Repository:
- AAAI.org
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
- Volume:
- 38
- Issue:
- 19
- ISSN:
- 2159-5399
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 21554 to 21562
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- differential privacy algorithmic fairness synthetic data
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
augmentations ---join or union-compatible datasets---that, when used to augment the requester's dataset, most improve model (e.g., linear regression) performance. Although effective, providers that manage personally identifiable data demand differential privacy (DP) guarantees before granting these platforms data access. Unfortunately, making data search differentially private is nontrivial, as a single search can involve training and evaluating datasets hundreds or thousands of times, quickly depleting privacy budgets.Saibot , a differentially private data search platform that employs Factorized Privacy Mechanism (FPM), a novel DP mechanism, to calculate sufficient semi-ring statistics for ML over different combinations of datasets. These statistics are privatized once, and can be freely reused for the search. This allows Saibot to scale to arbitrary numbers of datasets and requests, while minimizing the amount that DP noise affects search results. We optimize the sensitivity of FPM for common augmentation operations, and analyze its properties with respect to linear regression. Specifically, we develop an unbiased estimator for many-to-many joins, prove its bounds, and develop an optimization to redistribute DP noise to minimize the impact on the model. Our evaluation on a real-world dataset corpus of 329 datasets demonstrates thatSaibot can return augmentations that achieve model accuracy within 50--90% of non-private search, while the leading alternative DP mechanisms (TPM, APM, shuffling) are several orders of magnitude worse. -
Protection of individual privacy is a common concern when releasing and sharing data and information. Differential privacy (DP) formalizes privacy in probabilistic terms without making assumptions about the background knowledge of data intruders, and thus provides a robust concept for privacy protection. Practical applications of DP involve development of differentially private mechanisms to generate sanitized results at a pre-specified privacy budget. For the sanitization of statistics with publicly known bounds such as proportions and correlation coefficients, the bounding constraints will need to be incorporated in the differentially private mechanisms. There has been little work on examining the consequences of the bounding constraints on the accuracy of sanitized results and the statistical inferences of the population parameters based on the sanitized results. In this paper, we formalize the differentially private truncated and boundary inflated truncated (BIT) procedures for releasing statistics with publicly known bounding constraints. The impacts of the truncated and BIT Laplace procedures on the statistical accuracy and validity of sanitized statistics are evaluated both theoretically and empirically via simulation studies.more » « less
-
Abstract Organizations often collect private data and release aggregate statistics for the public’s benefit. If no steps toward preserving privacy are taken, adversaries may use released statistics to deduce unauthorized information about the individuals described in the private dataset. Differentially private algorithms address this challenge by slightly perturbing underlying statistics with noise, thereby mathematically limiting the amount of information that may be deduced from each data release. Properly calibrating these algorithms—and in turn the disclosure risk for people described in the dataset—requires a data curator to choose a value for a privacy budget parameter, ɛ . However, there is little formal guidance for choosing ɛ , a task that requires reasoning about the probabilistic privacy–utility tradeoff. Furthermore, choosing ɛ in the context of statistical inference requires reasoning about accuracy trade-offs in the presence of both measurement error and differential privacy (DP) noise. We present Vi sualizing P rivacy (ViP), an interactive interface that visualizes relationships between ɛ , accuracy, and disclosure risk to support setting and splitting ɛ among queries. As a user adjusts ɛ , ViP dynamically updates visualizations depicting expected accuracy and risk. ViP also has an inference setting, allowing a user to reason about the impact of DP noise on statistical inferences. Finally, we present results of a study where 16 research practitioners with little to no DP background completed a set of tasks related to setting ɛ using both ViP and a control. We find that ViP helps participants more correctly answer questions related to judging the probability of where a DP-noised release is likely to fall and comparing between DP-noised and non-private confidence intervals.more » « less
-
more » « less
Differentially Private Federated Learning (DP-FL) has garnered attention as a collaborative machine learning approach that ensures formal privacy. Most DP-FL approaches ensure DP at the record-level within each silo for cross-silo FL. However, a single user's data may extend across multiple silos, and the desired user-level DP guarantee for such a setting remains unknown. In this study, we present Uldp-FL, a novel FL framework designed to guarantee user-level DP in cross-silo FL where a single user's data may belong to multiple silos. Our proposed algorithm directly ensures user-level DP through per-user weighted clipping, departing from group-privacy approaches. We provide a theoretical analysis of the algorithm's privacy and utility. Additionally, we improve the utility of the proposed algorithm with an enhanced weighting strategy based on user record distribution and design a novel private protocol that ensures no additional information is revealed to the silos and the server. Experiments on real-world datasets show substantial improvements in our methods in privacy-utility trade-offs under user-level DP compared to baseline methods. To the best of our knowledge, our work is the first FL framework that effectively provides user-level DP in the general cross-silo FL setting.
-
more » « less
Differential privacy (DP) data synthesizers are increasingly proposed to afford public release of sensitive information, offering theoretical guarantees for privacy (and, in some cases, utility), but limited empirical evidence of utility in practical settings. Utility is typically measured as the error on representative proxy tasks, such as descriptive statistics, multivariate correlations, the accuracy of trained classifiers, or performance over a query workload. The ability for these results to generalize to practitioners' experience has been questioned in a number of settings, including the U.S. Census. In this paper, we propose an evaluation methodology for synthetic data that avoids assumptions about the representativeness of proxy tasks, instead measuring the likelihood that published conclusions would change had the authors used synthetic data, a condition we call epistemic parity. Our methodology consists of reproducing empirical conclusions of peer-reviewed papers on real, publicly available data, then re-running these experiments a second time on DP synthetic data and comparing the results.
We instantiate our methodology over a benchmark of recent peer-reviewed papers that analyze public datasets in the ICPSR social science repository. We model quantitative claims computationally to automate the experimental workflow, and model qualitative claims by reproducing visualizations and comparing the results manually. We then generate DP synthetic datasets using multiple state-of-the-art mechanisms, and estimate the likelihood that these conclusions will hold. We find that, for reasonable privacy regimes, state-of-the-art DP synthesizers are able to achieve high epistemic parity for several papers in our benchmark. However, some papers, and particularly some specific findings, are difficult to reproduce for any of the synthesizers. Given these results, we advocate for a new class of mechanisms that can reorder the priorities for DP data synthesis: favor stronger guarantees for utility (as measured by epistemic parity) and offer privacy protection with a focus on application-specific threat models and risk-assessment.
