Automatic Discovery of Privacy-Utility Pareto Fronts

Differential privacy is a mathematical framework for privacy-preserving data analysis. Changing the hyperparameters of a differentially private algorithm allows one to trade off privacy and utility in a principled way. Quantifying this trade-off in advance is essential to decision-makers tasked with deciding how much privacy can be provided in a particular application while keeping acceptable utility. For more complex tasks, such as training neural networks under differential privacy, the utility achieved by a given algorithm can only be measured empirically. This paper presents a Bayesian optimization methodology for efficiently characterizing the privacy-utility trade-off of any differentially private algorithm using only empirical measurements of its utility. The versatility of our method is illustrated on a number of machine learning tasks involving multiple models, optimizers, and datasets.

Hypothesis Testing Interpretations and Renyi Differential Privacy

Differential privacy is the gold standard in data privacy, with applications in the public and private sectors. While differential privacy is a formal mathematical definition from the theoretical computer science literature, it is also understood by statisticians and data experts thanks to its hypothesis testing interpretation. This informally says that one cannot effectively test whether a specific individual has contributed her data by observing the output of a private mechanism---any test cannot have both high significance and high power. In this paper, we show that recently proposed relaxations of differential privacy based on R\'enyi divergence do not enjoy a similar interpretation. Specifically, we introduce the notion of $k$-generatedness for an arbitrary divergence, where the parameter $k$ captures the hypothesis testing complexity of the divergence. We show that the divergence used for differential privacy is 2-generated, and hence it satisfies the hypothesis testing interpretation. In contrast, R\'enyi divergence is only $\infty$-generated, and hence has no hypothesis testing interpretation. We also show sufficient conditions for general divergences to be $k$-generated.

Privacy-preserving Active Learning on Sensitive Data for User Intent Classification

Active learning holds promise of significantly reducing data annotation costs while maintaining reasonable model performance. However, it requires sending data to annotators for labeling. This presents a possible privacy leak when the training set includes sensitive user data. In this paper, we describe an approach for carrying out privacy preserving active learning with quantifiable guarantees. We evaluate our approach by showing the tradeoff between privacy, utility and annotation budget on a binary classification task in a active learning setting.

Continual Learning in Practice

This paper describes a reference architecture for self-maintaining systems that can learn continually, as data arrives. In environments where data evolves, we need architectures that manage Machine Learning (ML) models in production, adapt to shifting data distributions, cope with outliers, retrain when necessary, and adapt to new tasks. This represents continual AutoML or Automatically Adaptive Machine Learning. We describe the challenges and proposes a reference architecture.

The Privacy Blanket of the Shuffle Model

This work studies differential privacy in the context of the recently proposed shuffle model. Unlike in the local model, where the server collecting privatized data from users can track back an input to a specific user, in the shuffle model users submit their privatized inputs to a server anonymously. This setup yields a trust model which sits in between the classical curator and local models for differential privacy. The shuffle model is the core idea in the Encode, Shuffle, Analyze (ESA) model introduced by Bittau et al. (SOPS 2017). Recent work by Cheu et al. (Forthcoming, EUROCRYPT 2019) analyzes the differential privacy properties of the shuffle model and shows that in some cases shuffled protocols provide strictly better accuracy than local protocols. Additionally, Erlignsson et al. (SODA 2019) provide a privacy amplification bound quantifying the level of curator differential privacy achieved by the shuffle model in terms of the local differential privacy of the randomizer used by each user. In this context, we make three contributions. First, we provide an optimal single message protocol for summation of real numbers in the shuffle model. Our protocol is very simple and has better accuracy and communication than the protocols for this same problem proposed by Cheu et al. Optimality of this protocol follows from our second contribution, a new lower bound for the accuracy of private protocols for summation of real numbers in the shuffle model. The third contribution is a new amplification bound for analyzing the privacy of protocols in the shuffle model in terms of the privacy provided by the corresponding local randomizer. Our amplification bound generalizes the results by Erlingsson et al. to a wider range of parameters, and provides a whole family of methods to analyze privacy amplification in the shuffle model.

Hierarchical Methods of Moments

Spectral methods of moments provide a powerful tool for learning the parameters of latent variable models. Despite their theoretical appeal, the applicability of these methods to real data is still limited due to a lack of robustness to model misspecification. In this paper we present a hierarchical approach to methods of moments to circumvent such limitations. Our method is based on replacing the tensor decomposition step used in previous algorithms with approximate joint diagonalization. Experiments on topic modeling show that our method outperforms previous tensor decomposition methods in terms of speed and model quality.

Subsampled Rényi Differential Privacy and Analytical Moments Accountant

We study the problem of subsampling in differential privacy (DP), a question that is the centerpiece behind many successful differentially private machine learning algorithms. Specifically, we provide a tight upper bound on the R\'enyi Differential Privacy (RDP) (Mironov, 2017) parameters for algorithms that: (1) subsample the dataset, and then (2) apply a randomized mechanism M to the subsample, in terms of the RDP parameters of M and the subsampling probability parameter. This result generalizes the classic subsampling-based "privacy amplification" property of $(\epsilon,\delta)$-differential privacy that applies to only one fixed pair of $(\epsilon,\delta)$, to a stronger version that exploits properties of each specific randomized algorithm and satisfies an entire family of $(\epsilon(\delta),\delta)$-differential privacy for all $\delta\in [0,1]$. Our experiments confirm the advantage of using our techniques over keeping track of $(\epsilon,\delta)$ directly, especially in the setting where we need to compose many rounds of data access.

Privacy Amplification by Subsampling: Tight Analyses via Couplings and Divergences

Differential privacy comes equipped with multiple analytical tools for the design of private data analyses. One important tool is the so called "privacy amplification by subsampling" principle, which ensures that a differentially private mechanism run on a random subsample of a population provides higher privacy guarantees than when run on the entire population. Several instances of this principle have been studied for different random subsampling methods, each with an ad-hoc analysis. In this paper we present a general method that recovers and improves prior analyses, yields lower bounds and derives new instances of privacy amplification by subsampling. Our method leverages a characterization of differential privacy as a divergence which emerged in the program verification community. Furthermore, it introduces new tools, including advanced joint convexity and privacy profiles, which might be of independent interest.

Improving the Gaussian Mechanism for Differential Privacy: Analytical Calibration and Optimal Denoising

The Gaussian mechanism is an essential building block used in multitude of differentially private data analysis algorithms. In this paper we revisit the Gaussian mechanism and show that the original analysis has several important limitations. Our analysis reveals that the variance formula for the original mechanism is far from tight in the high privacy regime ($\varepsilon \to 0$) and it cannot be extended to the low privacy regime ($\varepsilon \to \infty$). We address these limitations by developing an optimal Gaussian mechanism whose variance is calibrated directly using the Gaussian cumulative density function instead of a tail bound approximation. We also propose to equip the Gaussian mechanism with a post-processing step based on adaptive estimation techniques by leveraging that the distribution of the perturbation is known. Our experiments show that analytical calibration removes at least a third of the variance of the noise compared to the classical Gaussian mechanism, and that denoising dramatically improves the accuracy of the Gaussian mechanism in the high-dimensional regime.

Generalization Bounds for Weighted Automata

This paper studies the problem of learning weighted automata from a finite labeled training sample. We consider several general families of weighted automata defined in terms of three different measures: the norm of an automaton's weights, the norm of the function computed by an automaton, or the norm of the corresponding Hankel matrix. We present new data-dependent generalization guarantees for learning weighted automata expressed in terms of the Rademacher complexity of these families. We further present upper bounds on these Rademacher complexities, which reveal key new data-dependent terms related to the complexity of learning weighted automata.