MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416549481 · doi:10.1145/3719027.3744834

Secure Noise Sampling for Differentially Private Collaborative Learning

2025· article· W4416549481 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicholas Franzese, Congyu Fang, Rohit Garg, Xiao Wang, Somesh Jha, Nicolas Papernot, Adam Dziedzic

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsVector InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaVector InstituteCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchAppleAlfred P. Sloan FoundationMetaGovernment of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsNoise (video)Stochastic gradient descentGradient descentSet (abstract data type)ComputationSampling (signal processing)Sample (material)Artificial noiseTrain

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Differentially private stochastic gradient descent (DP-SGD) trains machine learning (ML) models with formal privacy guarantees for the training set by adding random noise to gradient updates. In collaborative learning (CL), where multiple parties jointly train a model, noise addition occurs either (i) before or (ii) during secure gradient aggregation. The first option is deployed in distributed DP methods, which require greater amounts of total noise to achieve security, resulting in degraded model utility. The second approach preserves model utility but requires a secure multiparty computation (MPC) protocol. Existing methods for MPC noise generation require tens to hundreds of seconds of runtime per noise sample because of the number of parties involved. This makes them impractical for collaborative learning, which often requires thousands or more samples of noise in each training step.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.280 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataFrench-language works237,207