Differentially Private Speaker Anonymization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sharing real-world speech utterances is key to the training and deployment of voice-based services. However, it also raises privacy risks as speech contains a wealth of personal data. Speaker anonymization aims to remove speaker information from a speech utterance while leaving its linguistic and prosodic attributes intact. State-of-the-art techniques operate by disentangling the speaker information (represented via a speaker embedding) from these attributes and re-synthesizing speech based on the speaker embedding of another speaker. Prior research in the privacy community has shown that anonymization often provides brittle privacy protection, even less so any provable guarantee. In this work, we show that disentanglement is indeed not perfect: linguistic and prosodic attributes still contain speaker information. We remove speaker information from these attributes by introducing differentially private feature extractors based on an autoencoder and an automatic speech recognizer, respectively, trained using noise layers. We plug these extractors in the state-of-the-art anonymization pipeline and generate, for the first time, private speech utterances with a provable upper bound on the speaker information they contain. We evaluate empirically the privacy and utility resulting from our differentially private speaker anonymization approach on the LibriSpeech data set. Experimental results show that the generated utterances retain very high utility for automatic speech recognition training and inference, while being much better protected against strong adversaries who leverage the full knowledge of the anonymization process to try to infer the speaker identity.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".