Functional Rényi differential privacy for generative modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Differential privacy (DP) has emerged as a rigorous notion to quantify data privacy. Subsequently, Rényi differential privacy (RDP) has become an alternative to the ordinary DP notion in both theoretical and empirical studies, because of its convenient compositional rules and flexibility. However, most mechanisms with DP (RDP) guarantees are essentially based on randomizing a fixed, finite-dimensional vector output. In this work, following Hall et al. [12] we further extend RDP to functional outputs, where the output space can be infinite-dimensional, and develop all necessary tools, e.g. (subsampled) Gaussian mechanism, composition, and post-processing rules, to facilitate its practical adoption. As an illustration, we apply functional RDP (f-RDP) to functions in the reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS) to develop a differentially private generative model (DPGM), where training can be interpreted as iteratively releasing loss functions (in an RKHS) with DP guarantees. Empirically, the new training paradigm achieves a significant improvement in privacy-utility trade-off compared to existing alternatives, especially when ϵ = 0.2. Our code is available at https://github.com/dihjiang/DP-kernel.
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 | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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".