Search for: All records

The notion of replicable algorithms was introduced by Impagliazzo, Lei, Pitassi, and Sorrell (STOC’22) to describe randomized algorithms that are stable under the resampling of their inputs. More precisely, a replicable algorithm gives the same output with high probability when its randomness is fixed and it is run on a new i.i.d. sample drawn from the same distribution. Using replicable algorithms for data analysis can facilitate the verification of published results by ensuring that the results of an analysis will be the same with high probability, even when that analysis is performed on a new data set. In this work, we establish new connections and separations between replicability and standard notions of algorithmic stability. In particular, we give sample-efficient algorithmic reductions between perfect generalization, approximate differential privacy, and replicability for a broad class of statistical problems. Conversely, we show any such equivalence must break down computationally: there exist statistical problems that are easy under differential privacy, but that cannot be solved replicably without breaking public-key cryptography. Furthermore, these results are tight: our reductions are statistically optimal, and we show that any computational separation between DP and replicability must imply the existence of one-way functions. Our statistical reductions give a new algorithmic framework for translating between notions of stability, which we instantiate to answer several open questions in replicability and privacy. This includes giving sample-efficient replicable algorithms for various PAC learning, distribution estimation, and distribution testing problems, algorithmic amplification of δ in approximate DP, conversions from item-level to user-level privacy, and the existence of private agnostic-to-realizable learning reductions under structured distributions. 

We use the EasyCrypt proof assistant to formalize the adversarial approach to proving lower bounds for computational problems in the query model. This is done using a lower bound game between an algorithm and adversary, in which the adversary answers the algorithm’s queries in a way that makes the algorithm issue at least the desired number of queries. A complementary upper bound game is used for proving upper bounds of algorithms; here the adversary incrementally and adaptively realizes an algorithm’s input. We prove a natural connection between the lower and upper bound games, and apply our framework to three computational problems, including searching in an ordered list and comparison-based sorting, giving evidence for the generality of our notion of algorithm and the usefulness of our framework. 

Formal reasoning about hashing-based probabilistic data structures often requires reasoning about random variables where when one variable gets larger (such as the number of elements hashed into one bucket), the others tend to be smaller (like the number of elements hashed into the other buckets). This is an example of negative dependence , a generalization of probabilistic independence that has recently found interesting applications in algorithm design and machine learning. Despite the usefulness of negative dependence for the analyses of probabilistic data structures, existing verification methods cannot establish this property for randomized programs. To fill this gap, we design LINA, a probabilistic separation logic for reasoning about negative dependence. Following recent works on probabilistic separation logic using separating conjunction to reason about the probabilistic independence of random variables, we use separating conjunction to reason about negative dependence. Our assertion logic features two separating conjunctions, one for independence and one for negative dependence. We generalize the logic of bunched implications (BI) to support multiple separating conjunctions, and provide a sound and complete proof system. Notably, the semantics for separating conjunction relies on a non-deterministic , rather than partial, operation for combining resources. By drawing on closure properties for negative dependence, our program logic supports a Frame-like rule for negative dependence and monotone operations. We demonstrate how LINA can verify probabilistic properties of hash-based data structures and balls-into-bins processes. 

Kleene algebra with tests (KAT) is a foundational equational framework for reasoning about programs, which has found applications in program transformations, networking and compiler optimizations, among many other areas. In his seminal work, Kozen proved that KAT subsumes propositional Hoare logic, showing that one can reason about the (partial) correctness of while programs by means of the equational theory of KAT. In this work, we investigate the support that KAT provides for reasoning about incorrectness, instead, as embodied by O'Hearn's recently proposed incorrectness logic. We show that KAT cannot directly express incorrectness logic. The main reason for this limitation can be traced to the fact that KAT cannot express explicitly the notion of codomain, which is essential to express incorrectness triples. To address this issue, we study Kleene Algebra with Top and Tests (TopKAT), an extension of KAT with a top element. We show that TopKAT is powerful enough to express a codomain operation, to express incorrectness triples, and to prove all the rules of incorrectness logic sound. This shows that one can reason about the incorrectness of while-like programs by means of the equational theory of TopKAT.