Graphical vs. Deep Generative Models: Measuring the Impact of Differentially Private Mechanisms and Budgets on Utility

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.10994v2
• Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 22:22:29 GMT
• Title: Graphical vs. Deep Generative Models: Measuring the Impact of Differentially Private Mechanisms and Budgets on Utility
• Authors: Georgi Ganev, Kai Xu, Emiliano De Cristofaro,
• Abstract summary: We compare graphical and deep generative models, focusing on the key factors contributing to how privacy budgets are spent. We find that graphical models distribute privacy budgets horizontally and thus cannot handle relatively wide datasets for a fixed training time. Deep generative models spend their budgets per iteration, so their behavior is less predictable with varying dataset dimensions.
• Score: 18.213030598476198
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Generative models trained with Differential Privacy (DP) can produce synthetic data while reducing privacy risks. However, navigating their privacy-utility tradeoffs makes finding the best models for specific settings/tasks challenging. This paper bridges this gap by profiling how DP generative models for tabular data distribute privacy budgets across rows and columns, which is one of the primary sources of utility degradation. We compare graphical and deep generative models, focusing on the key factors contributing to how privacy budgets are spent, i.e., underlying modeling techniques, DP mechanisms, and data dimensionality. Through our measurement study, we shed light on the characteristics that make different models suitable for various settings and tasks. For instance, we find that graphical models distribute privacy budgets horizontally and thus cannot handle relatively wide datasets for a fixed training time; also, the performance on the task they were optimized for monotonically increases with more data but could also overfit. Deep generative models spend their budgets per iteration, so their behavior is less predictable with varying dataset dimensions, but are more flexible as they could perform better if trained on more features. Moreover, low levels of privacy ($\epsilon\geq100$) could help some models generalize, achieving better results than without applying DP. We believe our work will aid the deployment of DP synthetic data techniques by navigating through the best candidate models vis-a-vis the dataset features, desired privacy levels, and downstream tasks.

Related papers

• Differentially Private Fine-Tuning of Diffusion Models [22.454127503937883]
  The integration of Differential Privacy with diffusion models (DMs) presents a promising yet challenging frontier. Recent developments in this field have highlighted the potential for generating high-quality synthetic data by pre-training on public data. We propose a strategy optimized for private diffusion models, which minimizes the number of trainable parameters to enhance the privacy-utility trade-off.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-03T14:18:04Z)
• Reconciling AI Performance and Data Reconstruction Resilience for Medical Imaging [52.578054703818125]
  Artificial Intelligence (AI) models are vulnerable to information leakage of their training data, which can be highly sensitive. Differential Privacy (DP) aims to circumvent these susceptibilities by setting a quantifiable privacy budget. We show that using very large privacy budgets can render reconstruction attacks impossible, while drops in performance are negligible.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-05T12:21:30Z)
• Sparsity-Preserving Differentially Private Training of Large Embedding Models [67.29926605156788]
  DP-SGD is a training algorithm that combines differential privacy with gradient descent. Applying DP-SGD naively to embedding models can destroy gradient sparsity, leading to reduced training efficiency. We present two new algorithms, DP-FEST and DP-AdaFEST, that preserve gradient sparsity during private training of large embedding models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-14T17:59:51Z)
• Approximate, Adapt, Anonymize (3A): a Framework for Privacy Preserving Training Data Release for Machine Learning [3.29354893777827]
  We introduce a data release framework, 3A (Approximate, Adapt, Anonymize), to maximize data utility for machine learning. We present experimental evidence showing minimal discrepancy between performance metrics of models trained on real versus privatized datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-04T18:37:11Z)
• Probing the Transition to Dataset-Level Privacy in ML Models Using an Output-Specific and Data-Resolved Privacy Profile [23.05994842923702]
  We study a privacy metric that quantifies the extent to which a model trained on a dataset using a Differential Privacy mechanism is covered" by each of the distributions resulting from training on neighboring datasets. We show that the privacy profile can be used to probe an observed transition to indistinguishability that takes place in the neighboring distributions as $epsilon$ decreases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-27T20:39:07Z)
• Private Set Generation with Discriminative Information [63.851085173614]
  Differentially private data generation is a promising solution to the data privacy challenge. Existing private generative models are struggling with the utility of synthetic samples. We introduce a simple yet effective method that greatly improves the sample utility of state-of-the-art approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-07T10:02:55Z)
• Large Scale Transfer Learning for Differentially Private Image Classification [51.10365553035979]
  Differential Privacy (DP) provides a formal framework for training machine learning models with individual example level privacy. Private training using DP-SGD protects against leakage by injecting noise into individual example gradients. While this result is quite appealing, the computational cost of training large-scale models with DP-SGD is substantially higher than non-private training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-06T01:22:20Z)
• Just Fine-tune Twice: Selective Differential Privacy for Large Language Models [69.66654761324702]
  We propose a simple yet effective just-fine-tune-twice privacy mechanism to achieve SDP for large Transformer-based language models. Experiments show that our models achieve strong performance while staying robust to the canary insertion attack.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-15T22:36:55Z)
• Don't Generate Me: Training Differentially Private Generative Models with Sinkhorn Divergence [73.14373832423156]
  We propose DP-Sinkhorn, a novel optimal transport-based generative method for learning data distributions from private data with differential privacy. Unlike existing approaches for training differentially private generative models, we do not rely on adversarial objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-01T18:10:21Z)
• DPlis: Boosting Utility of Differentially Private Deep Learning via Randomized Smoothing [0.0]
  We propose DPlis--Differentially Private Learning wIth Smoothing. We show that DPlis can effectively boost model quality and training stability under a given privacy budget.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-02T06:33:14Z)
• Differentially Private Synthetic Medical Data Generation using Convolutional GANs [7.2372051099165065]
  We develop a differentially private framework for synthetic data generation using R'enyi differential privacy. Our approach builds on convolutional autoencoders and convolutional generative adversarial networks to preserve some of the critical characteristics of the generated synthetic data. We demonstrate that our model outperforms existing state-of-the-art models under the same privacy budget.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-22T01:03:49Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.