MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132992026

In Differential Privacy, There is Truth: Evaluating PATE with Monte Carlo Adversaries

2024· dissertation· W7132992026 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jiaqi Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2024
Typedissertation
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyGovernment of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsDifferential privacyAdversaryConfidentialityNoise (video)Bounded functionVotingInformation privacyDifferential (mechanical device)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The shift from centralized to decentralized machine learning (ML) addresses privacy concerns associated with centralized data collection. A prominent approach for learning from decentralized data is the Private Aggregation of Teacher Ensembles, or PATE, which aggregates the predictions of a collection of teacher models. Aggregation is performed through a noised voting mechanism to reveal a collective prediction for the ensemble while providing differential privacy guarantees for the training data of each teacher model. PATE’s differential privacy guarantees protect only against adversaries that observe a bounded number of predictions. PATE provides virtually no privacy guarantees in the realistic setting where an adversary is allowed to query the system continuously. However, the prospects of such an attack have never been evaluated. We contribute to the first study on the confidentiality and privacy guarantees provided by PATE. We devise and implement an attack using Monte Carlo sampling to recover the votes submitted by participants of the PATE protocol, thus breaking PATE’s confidentiality guarantees. Surprisingly, we also show that our adversary is more successful in recovering voting information when the vote-aggregation mechanism introduces noise with a larger variance. Because differential privacy generally benefits from noise with greater variance, this reveals a tension between achieving confidentiality and differential privacy in collaborative learning settings. Next, we observe that PATE and its myriad variants assume that protocol participants, who contribute model votes, are honest. We evaluate scenarios where they can be corrupted by the attacker, and find that attacks become drastically more potent as the attacker is able to control more participants. Robustly defending against the attacks reported in this paper is non-trivial, and is likely to result in a significantly reduced utility of PATE.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.139
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.139
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0040.006
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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