MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385517984 · doi:10.56553/popets-2023-0124

Differentially Private Simple Genetic Algorithms

2023· article· en· W4385517984 on OpenAlexafffund
Thomas Humphries, Florian Kerschbaum

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaRoyal Bank of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)Sublinear functionBlock (permutation group theory)Function (biology)Domain (mathematical analysis)Mathematical optimizationAlgorithmSimple (philosophy)Noise (video)Exponential functionMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The differentially private (DP) selection problem is a fundamental building block in the private literature that is commonly solved with the exponential mechanism. It is well known that efficiency is the major drawback of the exponential mechanism, as the utility function must be computed for all elements in the domain. Genetic algorithms (GAs) use the principles of evolution in nature to efficiently search through large domains and select the best candidate. We observe that GAs have many appealing properties for DP Selection. These include being robust to noisy objectives, placing no restriction on the utility function, and efficient runtime for large domains. However, prior work investigating DP GAs has shown poor utility in practice and often gives the highest utility when zero generations are conducted (indicating that GA operations are not beneficial under DP). This work provides a new DPGA based on the simple GA that addresses the weaknesses of prior solutions. We reduce the destructive nature of previous GA operators and utilize several techniques to reduce the noise from DP. Our modifications allow us to utilize the GA operators over multiple generations (under DP) and improve the GA's overall utility over zero generation techniques. Our work shows that private GAs are competitive with state-of-the-art general and problem-specific solutions to the DP selection problem, with runtime sublinear in the domain size.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0480.126
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.244 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings on Privacy Enhancing TechnologiesSame topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207