General Gaussian Noise Mechanisms and Their Optimality for Unbiased Mean Estimation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate unbiased high-dimensional mean estimators in differential privacy. We consider differentially private mechanisms whose expected output equals the mean of the input dataset, for every dataset drawn from a fixed bounded $d$-dimensional domain $K$. A classical approach to private mean estimation is to compute the true mean and add unbiased, but possibly correlated, Gaussian noise to it. In the first part of this paper, we study the optimal error achievable by a Gaussian noise mechanism for a given domain $K$ when the error is measured in the $\ell_p$ norm for some $p \ge 2$. We give algorithms that compute the optimal covariance for the Gaussian noise for a given $K$ under suitable assumptions, and prove a number of nice geometric properties of the optimal error. These results generalize the theory of factorization mechanisms from domains $K$ that are symmetric and finite (or, equivalently, symmetric polytopes) to arbitrary bounded domains. In the second part of the paper we show that Gaussian noise mechanisms achieve nearly optimal error among all private unbiased mean estimation mechanisms in a very strong sense. In particular, for every input dataset, an unbiased mean estimator satisfying concentrated differential privacy introduces approximately at least as much error as the best Gaussian noise mechanism. We extend this result to local differential privacy, and to approximate differential privacy, but for the latter the error lower bound holds either for a dataset or for a neighboring dataset, and this relaxation is necessary.
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 | 0.024 | 0.080 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| 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".