MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3043060859 · doi:10.4230/lipics.itc.2021.18

Differentially Private Approximations of a Convex Hull in Low Dimensions

2020· preprint· en· W3043060859 on OpenAlexaff
Yue Gao, Or Sheffet

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvex hullMathematicsCombinatoricsConvex bodyRegular polygonKernel (algebra)Euclidean spaceBounding overwatchMinimum bounding boxBall (mathematics)Euclidean geometryDiscrete mathematicsGeometryImage (mathematics)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We give the first differentially private algorithms that estimate a variety of geometric features of points in the Euclidean space, such as diameter, width, volume of convex hull, min-bounding box, min-enclosing ball etc. Our work relies heavily on the notion of \emph{Tukey-depth}. Instead of (non-privately) approximating the convex-hull of the given set of points $P$, our algorithms approximate the geometric features of the $κ$-Tukey region induced by $P$ (all points of Tukey-depth $κ$ or greater). Moreover, our approximations are all bi-criteria: for any geometric feature $μ$ our $(α,Δ)$-approximation is a value "sandwiched" between $(1-α)μ(D_P(κ))$ and $(1+α)μ(D_P(κ-Δ))$. Our work is aimed at producing a \emph{$(α,Δ)$-kernel of $D_P(κ)$}, namely a set $\mathcal{S}$ such that (after a shift) it holds that $(1-α)D_P(κ)\subset \mathsf{CH}(\mathcal{S}) \subset (1+α)D_P(κ-Δ)$. We show that an analogous notion of a bi-critera approximation of a directional kernel, as originally proposed by Agarwal et al~[2004], \emph{fails} to give a kernel, and so we result to subtler notions of approximations of projections that do yield a kernel. First, we give differentially private algorithms that find $(α,Δ)$-kernels for a "fat" Tukey-region. Then, based on a private approximation of the min-bounding box, we find a transformation that does turn $D_P(κ)$ into a "fat" region \emph{but only if} its volume is proportional to the volume of $D_P(κ-Δ)$. Lastly, we give a novel private algorithm that finds a depth parameter $κ$ for which the volume of $D_P(κ)$ is comparable to $D_P(κ-Δ)$. We hope this work leads to the further study of the intersection of differential privacy and computational geometry.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.123 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207