MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Distributed empirical risk minimization with differential privacy

2024· article· en· W4391055620 on OpenAlex
Changxin Liu, Karl Henrik Johansson, Yang Shi

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAutomatica · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersKnut och Alice Wallenbergs StiftelseNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJapan Society for the Promotion of Science LondonInternational Federation of Automatic ControlVetenskapsrådetStiftelsen för Strategisk Forskning
KeywordsDifferential privacyBenchmark (surveying)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationConvergence (economics)Noise (video)MinificationEmpirical risk minimizationDual (grammatical number)Convex optimizationOptimization problemConstraint (computer-aided design)Class (philosophy)Fraction (chemistry)Regular polygonAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work studies the distributed empirical risk minimization (ERM) problem under differential privacy (DP) constraint. Standard distributed algorithms achieve DP typically by perturbing all local subgradients with noise, leading to significantly degenerated utility. To tackle this issue, we develop a class of private distributed dual averaging (DDA) algorithms, which activates a fraction of nodes to perform optimization. Such subsampling procedure provably amplifies the DP guarantee, thereby achieving an equivalent level of DP with reduced noise. We prove that the proposed algorithms have utility loss comparable to centralized private algorithms for both general and strongly convex problems. When removing the noise, our algorithm attains the optimal O(1/t) convergence for non-smooth stochastic optimization. Finally, experimental results on two benchmark datasets are given to verify the effectiveness of the proposed algorithms.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesOpen science
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0100.019
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.263 · 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