Search for: All records

A recent study by De et al. (2022) has reported that large-scale representation learning through pre-training on a public dataset significantly enhances differentially private (DP) learning in downstream tasks, despite the high dimensionality of the feature space. To theoretically explain this phenomenon, we consider the setting of a layer-peeled model in representation learning, which results in interesting phenomena related to learned features in deep learning and transfer learning, known as Neural Collapse (NC). Within the framework of NC, we establish an error bound indicating that the misclassification error is independent of dimension when the distance between actual features and the ideal ones is smaller than a threshold. Additionally, the quality of the features in the last layer is empirically evaluated under different pre-trained models within the framework of NC, showing that a more powerful transformer leads to a better feature representation. Furthermore, we reveal that DP fine-tuning is less robust compared to fine-tuning without DP, particularly in the presence of perturbations. These observations are supported by both theoretical analyses and experimental evaluation. Moreover, to enhance the robustness of DP fine-tuning, we suggest several strategies, such as feature normalization or employing dimension reduction methods like Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Empirically, we demonstrate a significant improvement in testing accuracy by conducting PCA on the last-layer features. 

Training Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) with adversarial examples often results in poor generalization to test-time adversarial data. This paper investigates this issue, known as adversarially robust generalization, through the lens of Rademacher complexity. Building upon the studies by Khim and Loh (2018); Yin et al. (2019), numerous works have been dedicated to this problem, yet achieving a satisfactory bound remains an elusive goal. Existing works on DNNs either apply to a surrogate loss instead of the robust loss or yield bounds that are notably looser compared to their standard counterparts. In the latter case, the bounds have a higher dependency on the width m of the DNNs or the dimension d of the data, with an extra factor of at least O(√m) or O(√d). This paper presents upper bounds for adversarial Rademacher complexity of DNNs that match the best-known upper bounds in standard settings, as established in the work of Bartlett et al. (2017), with the dependency on width and dimension being O(ln(dm)). The central challenge addressed is calculating the covering number of adversarial function classes. We aim to construct a new cover that possesses two properties: 1) compatibility with adversarial examples, and 2) precision comparable to covers used in standard settings. To this end, we introduce a new variant of covering number called the uniform covering number, specifically designed and proven to reconcile these two properties. Consequently, our method effectively bridges the gap between Rademacher complexity in robust and standard generalization. 

In the setting of conference peer review, the conference aims to accept high-quality papers and reject low-quality papers based on noisy review scores. A recent work proposes the isotonic mechanism, which can elicit the ranking of paper qualities from an author with multiple submissions to help improve the conference's decisions. However, the isotonic mechanism relies on the assumption that the author's utility is both an increasing and a convex function with respect to the review score, which is often violated in realistic settings (e.g.~when authors aim to maximize the number of accepted papers). In this paper, we propose a sequential review mechanism that can truthfully elicit the ranking information from authors while only assuming the agent's utility is increasing with respect to the true quality of her accepted papers. The key idea is to review the papers of an author in a sequence based on the provided ranking and conditioning the review of the next paper on the review scores of the previous papers. Advantages of the sequential review mechanism include: 1) eliciting truthful ranking information in a more realistic setting than prior work; 2) reducing the reviewing workload and increasing the average quality of papers being reviewed; 3) incentivizing authors to write fewer papers of higher quality. 

In this article, we present a detailed review of current practices and state-of-the-art methodologies in the field of differential privacy (DP), with a focus of advancing DP’s deployment in real-world applications. Key points and high-level contents of the article were originated from the discussions from “Differential Privacy (DP): Challenges Towards the Next Frontier,” a workshop held in July 2022 with experts from industry, academia, and the public sector seeking answers to broad questions pertaining to privacy and its implications in the design of industry-grade systems.This article aims to provide a reference point for the algorithmic and design decisions within the realm of privacy, highlighting important challenges and potential research directions. Covering a wide spectrum of topics, this article delves into the infrastructure needs for designing private systems, methods for achieving better privacy/utility trade-offs, performing privacy attacks and auditing, as well as communicating privacy with broader audiences and stakeholders. 

Abstract In the past decade, differential privacy has seen remarkable success as a rigorous and practical formalization of data privacy. This privacy definition and its divergence based relaxations, however, have several acknowledged weaknesses, either in handling composition of private algorithms or in analysing important primitives like privacy amplification by subsampling. Inspired by the hypothesis testing formulation of privacy, this paper proposes a new relaxation of differential privacy, which we term ‘f-differential privacy’ (f-DP). This notion of privacy has a number of appealing properties and, in particular, avoids difficulties associated with divergence based relaxations. First, f-DP faithfully preserves the hypothesis testing interpretation of differential privacy, thereby making the privacy guarantees easily interpretable. In addition, f-DP allows for lossless reasoning about composition in an algebraic fashion. Moreover, we provide a powerful technique to import existing results proven for the original differential privacy definition to f-DP and, as an application of this technique, obtain a simple and easy-to-interpret theorem of privacy amplification by subsampling for f-DP. In addition to the above findings, we introduce a canonical single-parameter family of privacy notions within the f-DP class that is referred to as ‘Gaussian differential privacy’ (GDP), defined based on hypothesis testing of two shifted Gaussian distributions. GDP is the focal privacy definition among the family of f-DP guarantees due to a central limit theorem for differential privacy that we prove. More precisely, the privacy guarantees of any hypothesis testing based definition of privacy (including the original differential privacy definition) converges to GDP in the limit under composition. We also prove a Berry–Esseen style version of the central limit theorem, which gives a computationally inexpensive tool for tractably analysing the exact composition of private algorithms. Taken together, this collection of attractive properties render f-DP a mathematically coherent, analytically tractable and versatile framework for private data analysis. Finally, we demonstrate the use of the tools we develop by giving an improved analysis of the privacy guarantees of noisy stochastic gradient descent.