DPack: Efficiency-Oriented Privacy Budget Scheduling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Machine learning (ML) models can leak information about users, and differential privacy (DP) provides a rigorous way to bound that leakage under a given budget. This DP budget can be regarded as a new type of computing resource in workloads of multiple ML models training on user data. Once it is used, the DP budget is forever consumed. Therefore, it is crucial to allocate it most efficiently to train as many models as possible. This paper presents a scheduler for the privacy resources that optimizes for efficiency. We formulate privacy scheduling as a new type of multidimensional knapsack problem, called privacy knapsack, which maximizes DP budget efficiency. We show that privacy knapsack is NP-hard, hence practical algorithms are necessarily approximate. We develop an approximation algorithm for privacy knapsack, DPack, and evaluate it on microbenchmarks and on a new, synthetic private-ML workload we developed from the Alibaba ML cluster trace. We show that DPack: (1) often approaches the efficiency-optimal schedule, (2) consistently schedules more tasks compared to a state-of-the-art privacy scheduling algorithm that focused on fairness instead of efficiency (1.3-1.7× in Alibaba, 1.0-2.6X in microbenchmarks), but (3) sacrifices some level of fairness for efficiency. Using DPack, DP ML operators should be able to train more models on the same amount of user data while offering the same privacy guarantee to their users.
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 | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".