Unbiased Statistical Estimation and Valid Confidence Intervals Under Differential Privacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a method for producing unbiased parameter estimates and valid confidence intervals under the constraints of differential privacy, a formal framework for limiting individual information leakage from sensitive data. Prior work in this area is limited in that it is tailored to calculating confidence intervals for specific statistical procedures, such as mean estimation or simple linear regression. While other recent work can produce confidence intervals for more general sets of procedures, they either yield only approximately unbiased estimates, are designed for one-dimensional outputs, or assume significant user knowledge about the data-generating distribution. Our method induces distributions of mean and covariance estimates via the bag of little bootstraps (BLB) and uses them to privately estimate the parameters' sampling distribution via a generalized version of the CoinPress estimation algorithm. If the user can bound the parameters of the BLB-induced parameters and provide heavier-tailed families, the algorithm produces unbiased parameter estimates and valid confidence intervals which hold with arbitrarily high probability. These results hold in high dimensions and for any estimation procedure which behaves nicely under the bootstrap.
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 | 0.028 | 0.242 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".