Optimal Bounds for Private Minimum Spanning Trees via Input Perturbation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the problem of privately releasing an approximate minimum spanning tree (MST). Given a graph G = ( V , E , W ) where V is a set of n vertices, E is a set of m undirected edges, and W ∈ ℝ |E| is an edge-weight vector, our goal is to publish an approximate MST under edge-weight differential privacy, as introduced by Sealfon in PODS 2016, where V and E are considered public and the weight vector is private. Our neighboring relation is 𝓁 ∞ -distance on weights: for a sensitivity parameter Δ ∞ , graphs G = ( V , E , W ) and G' = ( V , E , W ') are neighboring if || W - W '|| ∞ ≤ Δ ∞ ). Existing private MST algorithms face a trade-off, sacrificing either computational efficiency or accuracy. We show that it is possible to get the best of both worlds: With a suitable random perturbation of the input that does not suffice to make the weight vector private, the result of any non-private MST algorithm will be private and achieves a state-of-the-art error guarantee. Furthermore, by establishing a connection to Private Top-k Selection [Steinke and Ullman, FOCS '17], we give the first privacy-utility trade-off lower bound for MST under approximate differential privacy, demonstrating that the error magnitude, ~O(n 3/2 ), is optimal up to logarithmic factors. That is, our approach matches the time complexity of any non-private MST algorithm and at the same time achieves optimal error. We complement our theoretical treatment with experiments that confirm the practicality of our approach.
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 | 0.009 | 0.074 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".