Towards Private Learning on Decentralized Graphs With Local Differential Privacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many real-world networks are inherently decentralized. For example, in social networks, each user maintains a local view of a social graph, such as a list of friends and her profile. It is typical to collect these local views of social graphs and conduct graph learning tasks. However, learning over graphs can raise privacy concerns as these local views often contain sensitive information. In this paper, we seek to ensure private graph learning on a decentralized network graph. Towards this objective, we proposeSolitude, a new privacy-preserving learning framework based on graph neural networks (GNNs), with formal privacy guarantees based on edge local differential privacy. The crux ofSolitudeis a set of new delicate mechanisms that can calibrate the introduced noise in the decentralized graph collected from the users. The principle behind the calibration is the intrinsic properties shared by many real-world graphs, such as sparsity. Unlike existing work on locally private GNNs, our new framework can simultaneously protect node feature privacy and edge privacy, and can seamlessly incorporate with any GNN with privacy-utility guarantees. Extensive experiments on benchmarking datasets show thatSolitudecan retain the generalization capability of the learned GNN while preserving the users’ data privacy under given privacy budgets.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".