Abstract:E-values have attracted considerable interest in recent years as flexible tools for enabling anytime-valid and adaptive data analysis. Hypothesis testing is at the core of many of these applications, which can often involve private or sensitive data. In this work, we answer a simple but important question: given two distributions $\mathbb{P}$ and $\mathbb{Q}$, what is the maximum achievable e-power when testing $X\sim \mathbb{P}^n$ against $X\sim\mathbb{Q}^n$ with e-values that satisfy $\varepsilon$-differential privacy? We characterize the optimal rate for this problem and provide an algorithm which matches it exactly. In the sequential setting, when observations arrive one-by-one and the analyst chooses when to halt, we give matching upper and lower bounds on the stopping times of any private e-process. Numerical experiments confirm the practicality of our algorithms, which require less data than the recently proposed DP-SPRT across a range of sequential testing problems and privacy levels.
Abstract:We study the problem of differentially private continual counting in the unbounded setting where the input size $n$ is not known in advance. Current state-of-the-art algorithms based on optimal instantiations of the matrix mechanism cannot be directly applied here because their privacy guarantees only hold when key parameters are tuned to $n$. Using the common `doubling trick' avoids knowledge of $n$ but leads to suboptimal and non-smooth error. We solve this problem by introducing novel matrix factorizations based on logarithmic perturbations of the function $\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-z}}$ studied in prior works, which may be of independent interest. The resulting algorithm has smooth error, and for any $\alpha > 0$ and $t\leq n$ it is able to privately estimate the sum of the first $t$ data points with $O(\log^{2+2\alpha}(t))$ variance. It requires $O(t)$ space and amortized $O(\log t)$ time per round, compared to $O(\log(n)\log(t))$ variance, $O(n)$ space and $O(n \log n)$ pre-processing time for the nearly-optimal bounded-input algorithm of Henzinger et al. (SODA 2023). Empirically, we find that our algorithm's performance is also comparable to theirs in absolute terms: our variance is less than $1.5\times$ theirs for $t$ as large as $2^{24}$.