TreePIR: Efficient Private Retrieval of Merkle Proofs via Tree Colorings with Fast Indexing and Zero Storage Overhead
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Batch Private Information Retrieval (batch-PIR) scheme allows a client to retrieve multiple data items from a database without revealing them to the storage server(s). Most existing approaches for batch - Pirare based on batch codes, in particular, probabilistic batch codes (PBC) (Angel et al. S&P'18), which incur large storage overheads. In this work, we show that zero storage overhead is achievable for tree-shaped databases. In particular, we develop TreePIR, a novel approach tailored made for private retrieval of the set of nodes along an arbitrary root-to-leaf path in a Merkle tree with no storage redundancy. This type of tree has been widely implemented in many real-world systems such as Amazon DynamoDB, Google's Certificate Transparency, and blockchains. Tree nodes along a root-to-leaf path forms the well-known Merkle proof. TreePIR, which employs a novel tree coloring, outperforms PBC, a fundamental component in state-of-the-art batch-PIR schemes (Angel et al. S&P'18, Mughees-Ren S&P'23, Liu et al. S&P'24), in all metrics, achieving 3 ×lower total storage and 1.5-3 ×lower computation and communication costs. Most notably, TreePIR has 8-160× lower setup time and its polylog-complexity indexing algorithm is 19–160 ×faster than PBC for trees of 2<sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">10</sup> _2<sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">24</sup>leaves.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".