We investigate the direct-sum problem in the context of differentially private PAC learning: What is the sample complexity of solving k learning tasks simultaneously under differential privacy, and how does this cost compare to that of solving k learning tasks without privacy? In our setting, an individual example consists of a domain element x labeled by k unknown concepts (c1,...,ck). The goal of a multi-learner is to output k hypotheses (h1,...,hk) that generalize the input examples. Without concern for privacy, the sample complexity needed to simultaneously learn @math concepts is essentially the same as needed for learning a single concept. Under differential privacy, the basic strategy of learning each hypothesis independently yields sample complexity that grows polynomially with k. For some concept classes, we give multi-learners that require fewer samples than the basic strategy. Unfortunately, however, we also give lower bounds showing that even for very simple concept classes, the sample cost of private multi-learning must grow polynomially in k.
Differential privacy was defined in @cite_1 and the relaxation to approximate differential privacy is from @cite_18 . Most related to our work is the work on private learning and its sample complexity @cite_38 @cite_3 @cite_4 @cite_0 @cite_42 @cite_26 @cite_24 @cite_8 @cite_17 @cite_39 and the early work on sanitization @cite_32 . That many natural'' learning tasks can be performed privately was shown in the early work of @cite_38 and @cite_3 . A characterization for the sample complexity of pure-private learners was given in @cite_26 , in terms of a new combinatorial measure -- the Representation Dimension , that is, given a class @math , the number of samples needed and sufficient for privately learning @math is @math . Building on @cite_26 , Feldman and Xiao @cite_8 showed an equivalence between the representation dimension of a concept @math and the randomized one-way communication complexity of the evaluation problem for concepts from @math . Using this equivalence they separated the sample complexity of pure-private learners from that of non-private ones.
@cite_38 @cite_18 @cite_26 @cite_4 @cite_8 @cite_42 @cite_1 @cite_32 @cite_3 @cite_39 @cite_0 @cite_24 @cite_17
1603362050 2949611647 2962958653 2171200367 2099259603 2071511328 2279913547 2096223017 1886087434 2564029303 1493407996 2260333220 2964237819
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 (2006) 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 PAC and agnostic learning was studied in a number of prior works starting with (, 2008) but a number of basic questions still remain open, most notably whether learning with privacy requires more samples than learning without privacy. We show that the sample complexity of learning with (pure) differential privacy can be arbitrarily higher than the sample complexity of learning without the privacy constraint or the sample complexity of learning with approximate differential privacy. Our second contribution and the main tool is an equivalence between the sample complexity of (pure) differentially private learning of a concept class @math (or @math ) and the randomized one-way communication complexity of the evaluation problem for concepts from @math . Using this equivalence we prove the following bounds: 1. @math , where @math is the Littlestone's (1987) dimension characterizing the number of mistakes in the online-mistake-bound learning model. Known bounds on @math then imply that @math can be much higher than the VC-dimension of @math . 2. For any @math , there exists a class @math such that @math but @math . 3. For any @math , there exists a class @math such that the sample complexity of (pure) @math -differentially private PAC learning is @math but the sample complexity of the relaxed @math -differentially private PAC learning is @math . This resolves an open problem of (2013b). We compare the sample complexity of private learning [ 2008] and sanitization [ 2008] under pure @math -differential privacy [ TCC 2006] and approximate @math -differential privacy [ Eurocrypt 2006]. We show that the sample complexity of these tasks under approximate differential privacy can be significantly lower than that under pure differential privacy. We define a family of optimization problems, which we call Quasi-Concave Promise Problems, that generalizes some of our considered tasks. We observe that a quasi-concave promise problem can be privately approximated using a solution to a smaller instance of a quasi-concave promise problem. This allows us to construct an efficient recursive algorithm solving such problems privately. Specifically, we construct private learners for point functions, threshold functions, and axis-aligned rectangles in high dimension. Similarly, we construct sanitizers for point functions and threshold functions. We also examine the sample complexity of label-private learners, a relaxation of private learning where the learner is required to only protect the privacy of the labels in the sample. We show that the VC dimension completely characterizes the sample complexity of such learners, that is, the sample complexity of learning with label privacy is equal (up to constants) to learning without 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... We prove new upper and lower bounds on the sample complexity of (a#x03B5;, a#x03B4;) differentially private algorithms for releasing approximate answers to threshold functions. A threshold function cx over a totally ordered domain X evaluates to cx(y) = 1 if y a#x2264; x, and evaluates to 0 otherwise. We give the first nontrivial lower bound for releasing thresholds with (a#x03B5;, a#x03B4;) differential privacy, showing that the task is impossible over an infinite domain X, and moreover requires sample complexity n a#x2265; (log* |X|), which grows with the size of the domain. Inspired by the techniques used to prove this lower bound, we give an algorithm for releasing thresholds with n a#x2264; 2(1+o(1)) log* |X| samples. This improves the previous best upper bound of 8(1+o(1)) log* |X| (, RANDOM'13). Our sample complexity upper and lower bounds also apply to the tasks of learning distributions with respect to Kolmogorov distance and of properly PAC learning thresholds with differential privacy. The lower bound gives the first separation between the sample complexity of properly learning a concept class with (a#x03B5;, a#x03B4;) differential privacy and learning without privacy. For properly learning thresholds in 'dimensions, this lower bound extends to n a#x2265; (l a#x2219; log* |X|). To obtain our results, we give reductions in both directions from releasing and properly learning thresholds and the simpler interior point problem. Given a database D of elements from X, the interior point problem asks for an element between the smallest and largest elements in D. We introduce new recursive constructions for bounding the sample complexity of the interior point problem, as well as further reductions and techniques for proving impossibility results for other basic problems in differential privacy. Differential privacy is a robust privacy standard that has been successfully applied to a range of data analysis tasks. But despite much recent work, optimal strategies for answering a collection of related queries are not known. We propose the matrix mechanism, a new algorithm for answering a workload of predicate counting queries. Given a workload, the mechanism requests answers to a different set of queries, called a query strategy, which are answered using the standard Laplace mechanism. Noisy answers to the workload queries are then derived from the noisy answers to the strategy queries. This two stage process can result in a more complex correlated noise distribution that preserves differential privacy but increases accuracy. We provide a formal analysis of the error of query answers produced by the mechanism and investigate the problem of computing the optimal query strategy in support of a given workload. We show this problem can be formulated as a rank-constrained semidefinite program. Finally, we analyze two seemingly distinct techniques, whose similar behavior is explained by viewing them as instances of the matrix mechanism. Differential privacy has emerged as one of the most promising privacy models for private data release. It can be used to release different types of data, and, in particular, histograms, which provide useful summaries of a dataset. Several differentially private histogram releasing schemes have been proposed recently. However, most of them directly add noise to the histogram counts, resulting in undesirable accuracy. In this paper, we propose two sanitization techniques that exploit the inherent redundancy of real-life datasets in order to boost the accuracy of histograms. They lossily compress the data and sanitize the compressed data. Our first scheme is an optimization of the Fourier Perturbation Algorithm (FPA) presented in RN10 . It improves the accuracy of the initial FPA by a factor of 10. The other scheme relies on clustering and exploits the redundancy between bins. Our extensive experimental evaluation over various real-life and synthetic datasets demonstrates that our techniques preserve very accurate distributions and considerably improve the accuracy of range queries over attributed histograms. The traditional notion of generalization---i.e., learning a hypothesis whose empirical error is close to its true error---is surprisingly brittle. As has recently been noted in [DFH+15b], even if several algorithms have this guarantee in isolation, the guarantee need not hold if the algorithms are composed adaptively. In this paper, we study three notions of generalization---increasing in strength---that are robust to postprocessing and amenable to adaptive composition, and examine the relationships between them. We call the weakest such notion Robust Generalization. A second, intermediate, notion is the stability guarantee known as differential privacy. The strongest guarantee we consider we call Perfect Generalization. We prove that every hypothesis class that is PAC learnable is also PAC learnable in a robustly generalizing fashion, with almost the same sample complexity. It was previously known that differentially private algorithms satisfy robust generalization. In this paper, we show that robust generalization is a strictly weaker concept, and that there is a learning task that can be carried out subject to robust generalization guarantees, yet cannot be carried out subject to differential privacy. We also show that perfect generalization is a strictly stronger guarantee than differential privacy, but that, nevertheless, many learning tasks can be carried out subject to the guarantees of perfect generalization. In 2008, Kasiviswanathan el al. defined private learning as a combination of PAC learning and differential privacy [16]. Informally, a private learner is applied to a collection of labeled individual information and outputs a hypothesis while preserving the privacy of each individual. gave a generic construction of private learners for (finite) concept classes, with sample complexity logarithmic in the size of the concept class. This sample complexity is higher than what is needed for non-private learners, hence leaving open the possibility that the sample complexity of private learning may be sometimes significantly higher than that of non-private learning. We give a combinatorial characterization of the sample size sufficient and necessary to privately learn a class of concepts. This characterization is analogous to the well known characterization of the sample complexity of non-private learning in terms of the VC dimension of the concept class. We introduce the notion of probabilistic representation of a concept class, and our new complexity measure RepDim corresponds to the size of the smallest probabilistic representation of the concept class. We show that any private learning algorithm for a concept class C with sample complexity m implies RepDim(C) = O(m), and that there exists a private learning algorithm with sample complexity m = O(RepDim(C)). We further demonstrate that a similar characterization holds for the database size needed for privately computing a large class of optimization problems and also for the well studied problem of private data release. We consider the problem of Bayesian learning on sensitive datasets and present two simple but somewhat surprising results that connect Bayesian learning to "differential privacy", a cryptographic approach to protect individual-level privacy while permitting database-level utility. Specifically, we show that under standard assumptions, getting one sample from a posterior distribution is differentially private "for free"; and this sample as a statistical estimator is often consistent, near optimal, and computationally tractable. Similarly but separately, we show that a recent line of work that use stochastic gradient for Hybrid Monte Carlo (HMC) sampling also preserve differentially privacy with minor or no modifications of the algorithmic procedure at all, these observations lead to an "anytime" algorithm for Bayesian learning under privacy constraint. We demonstrate that it performs much better than the state-of-the-art differential private methods on synthetic and real datasets. This paper investigates the relation between three different notions of privacy: identifiability, differential privacy, and mutual-information privacy. Under a unified privacy-distortion framework, where the distortion is defined to be the expected Hamming distance between the input and output databases, we establish some fundamental connections between these three privacy notions. Given a maximum allowable distortion @math , we define the privacy-distortion functions @math , @math , and @math to be the smallest (most private best) identifiability level, differential privacy level, and mutual information between the input and the output, respectively. We characterize @math and @math , and prove that @math for @math within certain range, where @math is a constant determined by the prior distribution of the original database @math , and diminishes to zero when @math is uniformly distributed. Furthermore, we show that @math and @math can be achieved by the same mechanism for @math within certain range, i.e., there is a mechanism that simultaneously minimizes the identifiability level and achieves the best mutual-information privacy. Based on these two connections, we prove that this mutual-information optimal mechanism satisfies @math -differential privacy with @math . The results in this paper reveal some consistency between two worst case notions of privacy, namely, identifiability and differential privacy, and an average notion of privacy, mutual-information privacy. The definition of differential privacy has recently emerged as a leading standard of privacy guarantees for algorithms on statistical databases. We offer several relaxations of the definition which require privacy guarantees to hold only against efficient--i.e., computationally-bounded--adversaries. We establish various relationships among these notions, and in doing so, we observe their close connection with the theory of pseudodense sets by [1]. We extend the dense model theorem of to demonstrate equivalence between two definitions (indistinguishability- and simulatability-based) of computational differential privacy. Our computational analogues of differential privacy seem to allow for more accurate constructions than the standard information-theoretic analogues. In particular, in the context of private approximation of the distance between two vectors, we present a differentially-private protocol for computing the approximation, and contrast it with a substantially more accurate protocol that is only computationally differentially private. We investigate the direct-sum problem in the context of differentially private PAC learning: What is the sample complexity of solving k learning tasks simultaneously under differential privacy, and how does this cost compare to that of solving k learning tasks without privacy? In our setting, an individual example consists of a domain element x labeled by k unknown concepts (c1,...,ck). The goal of a multi-learner is to output k hypotheses (h1,...,hk) that generalize the input examples. Without concern for privacy, the sample complexity needed to simultaneously learn @math concepts is essentially the same as needed for learning a single concept. Under differential privacy, the basic strategy of learning each hypothesis independently yields sample complexity that grows polynomially with k. For some concept classes, we give multi-learners that require fewer samples than the basic strategy. Unfortunately, however, we also give lower bounds showing that even for very simple concept classes, the sample cost of private multi-learning must grow polynomially in k. While machine learning has proven to be a powerful data-driven solution to many real-life problems, its use in sensitive domains has been limited due to privacy concerns. A popular approach known as differential privacy offers provable privacy guarantees, but it is often observed in practice that it could substantially hamper learning accuracy. In this paper we study the learnability (whether a problem can be learned by any algorithm) under Vapnik's general learning setting with differential privacy constraint, and reveal some intricate relationships between privacy, stability and learnability. In particular, we show that a problem is privately learnable if an only if there is a private algorithm that asymptotically minimizes the empirical risk (AERM). In contrast, for non-private learning AERM alone is not sufficient for learnability. This result suggests that when searching for private learning algorithms, we can restrict the search to algorithms that are AERM. In light of this, we propose a conceptual procedure that always finds a universally consistent algorithm whenever the problem is learnable under privacy constraint. We also propose a generic and practical algorithm and show that under very general conditions it privately learns a wide class of learning problems. Lastly, we extend some of the results to the more practical (e, δ)-differential privacy and establish the existence of a phase-transition on the class of problems that are approximately privately learnable with respect to how small δ needs to be.