We examine a reductions approach to fair optimization and learning where a black-box optimizer is used to learn a fair model for classification or regression [, 2018, , 2018] and explore the creation of such fair models that adhere to data privacy guarantees (specifically differential privacy). For this approach, we consider two suites of use cases: the first is for optimizing convex performance measures of the confusion matrix (such as @math -mean and @math -mean); the second is for satisfying statistical definitions of algorithmic fairness (such as equalized odds, demographic parity, and the gini index of inequality). The reductions approach to fair optimization can be abstracted as the constrained group-objective optimization problem where we aim to optimize an objective that is a function of losses of individual groups, subject to some constraints. We present two differentially private algorithms: an @math exponential sampling algorithm and an @math algorithm that uses a linear optimizer to incrementally move toward the best decision. We analyze the privacy and utility guarantees of these empirical risk minimization algorithms. Compared to a previous method for ensuring differential privacy subject to a relaxed form of the equalized odds fairness constraint, the @math differentially private algorithm we present provides asymptotically better sample complexity guarantees. The technique of using an approximate linear optimizer oracle to achieve privacy might be applicable to other problems not considered in this paper. Finally, we show an algorithm-agnostic lower bound on the accuracy of any solution to the problem of @math or @math private constrained group-objective optimization.
: In this paper, we focus on developing @math differentially private algorithms. Certain relaxations of statistical differential privacy exist. For example, in a recent work @cite_9 show new privacy amplification theorems using Renyi differential privacy as the definition. The @math differentially private algorithms presented in this paper can all be modified to be stated in terms of Renyi differential privacy and or concentrated differential privacy .
@cite_9
2963699739 2963828152 2809701319 2962958653
"Concentrated differential privacy" was recently introduced by Dwork and Rothblum as a relaxation of differential privacy, which permits sharper analyses of many privacy-preserving computations. We present an alternative formulation of the concept of concentrated differential privacy in terms of the Renyi divergence between the distributions obtained by running an algorithm on neighboring inputs. With this reformulation in hand, we prove sharper quantitative results, establish lower bounds, and raise a few new questions. We also unify this approach with approximate differential privacy by giving an appropriate definition of "approximate concentrated differential privacy". With the newly proposed privacy definition of Renyi Differential Privacy (RDP) in (Mironov, 2017), we re-examine the inherent privacy of releasing a single sample from a posterior distribution. We exploit the impact of the prior distribution in mitigating the influence of individual data points. In particular, we focus on sampling from an exponential family and specific generalized linear models, such as logistic regression. We propose novel RDP mechanisms as well as offering a new RDP analysis for an existing method in order to add value to the RDP framework. Each method is capable of achieving arbitrary RDP privacy guarantees, and we offer experimental results of their efficacy. Differential privacy has emerged as the main definition for private data analysis and machine learning. The global model of differential privacy, which assumes that users trust the data collector, provides strong privacy guarantees and introduces small errors in the output. In contrast, applications of differential privacy in commercial systems by Apple, Google, and Microsoft, use the local model. Here, users do not trust the data collector, and hence randomize their data before sending it to the data collector. Unfortunately, local model is too strong for several important applications and hence is limited in its applicability. In this work, we propose a framework based on trusted processors and a new definition of differential privacy called Oblivious Differential Privacy, which combines the best of both local and global models. The algorithms we design in this framework show interesting interplay of ideas from the streaming algorithms, oblivious algorithms, and differential privacy. In this work we analyze the sample complexity of classification by differentially private algorithms. Differential privacy is a strong and well-studied notion of privacy introduced by [Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci. 3876, Springer, New York, 2006, pp. 265--284] that ensures that the output of an algorithm leaks little information about the data point provided by any of the participating individuals. Sample complexity of private probably approximately correct (PAC) and agnostic learning was studied in a number of prior works starting with [SIAM J. Comput., 40 (2011), pp. 793--826]. However, a number of basic questions remain open [A. Beimel, S. P. Kasiviswanathan, and K. Nissim, Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci. 5978, Springer, New York, 2006, pp. 437--454; K. Chaudhuri and D. Hsu, Proceedings of Conference in Learning Theory, 2011, pp. 155--186; A. Beimel, K. Nissim, and U. Stemmer, Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science, 2013, pp. 9...