APEx: Accuracy-Aware Differentially Private Data Exploration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organizations are increasingly interested in allowing external data scientists to explore their sensitive datasets. Due to the popularity of differential privacy, data owners want the data exploration to ensure provable privacy guarantees. However, current systems for answering queries with differential privacy place an inordinate burden on the data analysts to understand differential privacy, manage their privacy budget, and even implement new algorithms for noisy query answering. Moreover, current systems do not provide any guarantees to the data analyst on the quality they care about, namely accuracy of query answers. We present APEx, a novel system that allows data analysts to pose adaptively chosen sequences of queries along with required accuracy bounds. By translating queries and accuracy bounds into differentially private algorithms with the least privacy loss, APEx returns query answers to the data analyst that meet the accuracy bounds, and proves to the data owner that the entire data exploration process is differentially private. Our comprehensive experimental study on real datasets demonstrates that APEx can answer a variety of queries accurately with moderate to small privacy loss, and can support data exploration for entity resolution with high accuracy under reasonable privacy settings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.154 | 0.549 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".