An approach to interpreting and setting $\varepsilon$ is presented, in which the practitioner establishes bounds on the posterior odds that adversaries can learn sensitive information, and the practitioner converts these bounds to values of $\varepsilon$.
Abstract
Differential privacy is a mathematical definition of what it means to protect data subjects'privacy in data releases. Differential privacy depends on a parameter $\epsilon$ known as the privacy budget. The value of $\varepsilon$ determines the nature of the privacy guarantee, with smaller values generally offering more privacy. However, reducing $\varepsilon$ also tends to decrease the accuracy of results protected with differentially private algorithms. Setting a value for $\varepsilon$ that satisfactorily balances this risk/accuracy trade off is complicated in practice, and there is not a standard approach to doing so. In part this is because practitioners may struggle to understand the privacy guarantee afforded by $\varepsilon$. We present an approach to interpreting and setting $\varepsilon$ in which (i) the practitioner establishes bounds on the posterior odds that adversaries can learn sensitive information, and (ii) the practitioner converts these bounds to values of $\varepsilon$. We illustrate the approach using data from a case control study.
The findings suggest that the inferential privacy guarantees provided by differentially private mechanisms may be substantially stronger in practice than what is implied by the theoretical upper limit.
Jan Reiter Sørensen, H. S. Christensen, Rasmus Rask Kragh Jørgensen et al.· 0 citations
Private Inference-Time Pessimism (PrivITP) is introduced, which combines $\chi^2$-regularized rejection sampling with a two-phase Gaussian mechanism, and achieves ex-post $(\epsilon,\delta)$-DP with a privacy cost independent of the number of responses, cleanly decouples the regularization parameter from the privacy pa...
I. Jain, Nandini Bhattad, Sayak Ray Chowdhury· 0 citations
This work proposes a high entropy differential privacy implementation that maintains the aggregation invariants with probability one or exponentially close to one and derive the privacy guarantees for the implementation under the invariants.
This work studies how precise central differential privacy and local differential privacy can be for common voting rules, including Plurality, Condorcet, Maximin, Plurality with Runoff, and Single Transferable Vote, and proves upper bounds on the required margin for these algorithms.
Quentin Hillebrand, Pasin Manurangsi, Vorapong Suppakitpaisarn et al.· 1 citation
Statistical agencies increasingly rely on small area estimation to produce reliable estimates for subpopulations with limited sample sizes. These estimates are built from individual survey responses, so agencies must ensure that releasing them does not reveal information about any single respondent. We show that when a...
This work argues that privacy cost, the information leakage borne by each group, is itself a form of harm, and adopts a compensatory-fairness framework in which a group that involuntarily bears greater privacy exposure is owed proportionally greater benefit from the system.
Rakshit Naidu· arXiv.org· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.