The paper introduces a differentially private framework for sparse reward estimation in reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF). It assumes that only a small subset of features influences human preferences and provides theoretical error bounds for both Sample-DP and Label-DP settings under the Bradley-Terry-Luce model. Empirical results show that the proposed methods outperform dense baselines on sentiment generation and safety alignment tasks, achieving a better privacy‑utility trade‑off.
By Meng Ding, Mingxi Lei, Jie Zhang, Jinyan Liu, Di Wang
arXiv:2607. 19580v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Differentially private machine learning enables model training on sensitive data while ensuring that individual data is unlikely to be recoverable from the parameters of the resulting model.
By Huaiyuan Rao, Calvin Hawkins, Alexander Benvenuti, Matthew Hale
The paper addresses the challenge of selecting external datasets for private transfer learning by modeling high‑dimensional regression with heterogeneous sources and a weighted ridge estimator. It relies solely on aggregated statistics and offers privacy guarantees under $
ho$‑zero‑concentrated differential privacy for labels or both features and labels. A deterministic equivalent of test error is derived, enabling optimization of hyperparameters and decision‑making about the utility of private external data without accessing individual records.
By Filip Kova\v{c}evi\'c, Edwige Cyffers, Stefano Sarao Mannelli, Marco Mondelli
arXiv:2601. 10237v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent (DP-SGD) is the dominant paradigm for private training, but its fundamental limitations under worst-case adversarial privacy definitions remain poorly understood.
By Murat Bilgehan Ertan, Marten van Dijk
arXiv:2601. 14033v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Machine learning models are increasingly served behind APIs.
By Xiaochen Zhu, Mayuri Sridhar, Srinivas Devadas
arXiv:2609.37344v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Data reconstruction attacks have empirically been successful in recovering training samples from learned models, raising privacy concerns and motivat...
By Max Cairney-Leeming, Simone Bombari, Marco Mondelli
The paper introduces Fulcrum, a topology‑aware differential privacy scheme for hierarchical federated learning that allocates noise based on the size and exposure of regional aggregation groups. By deriving a closed‑form exposure dispersion metric from region structure and weights, the method optimally balances privacy and utility, achieving up to 14.84% accuracy gains on image tasks and 12.16% on text tasks at ε = 0.99 compared to uniform noise allocation. The approach ensures each participant receives noise commensurate with its actual exposure, eliminating unnecessary privacy overhead.
By Murtaza Rangwala, Richard O. Sinnott, Rajkumar Buyya
arXiv:2605. 06259v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Within the $f$-DP framework, we derive a tight analysis of the trade-off function for Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent (DP-SGD) with subsampling based on random allocation in which each sample is independently assigned to exactly one of $M$ minibatches per epoch, each minibatch corresponding to one of the $M$ SGD rounds within a single epoch.
By Marten van Dijk, Murat Bilgehan Ertan
arXiv:2407. 08233v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Current differentially private learning paradigms face a severe utility bottleneck: DP-SGD degrades performance through noise accumulation over training steps, while aggregation-based approaches such as PATE suffer from data inefficiency due to disjoint data partitioning.
By Ding Chen, Haochen Luo, Xiaofei Wang, Chen Liu
arXiv:2606. 02563v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Heterogeneous Differential Privacy (HDP) in Federated Learning (FL) allows clients to select individual privacy budgets ($\varepsilon_i$) according to institutional policies and data sensitivity.
By Farhin Farhad Riya, Olivera Kotevska, Jinyuan Stella Sun
Heterogeneous Differential Privacy (HDP) in Federated Learning (FL) allows clients to select individual privacy budgets ($\varepsilon_i$) according to institutional policies and data sensitivity. In practice, many HDP-FL systems employ $\varepsilon$-aware server aggregation to improve model utility by re-weighting client updates according to their declared privacy budgets.
arXiv:2503. 10945v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Current practices for reporting differential privacy (DP) guarantees for machine learning (ML) algorithms such as DP-SGD provide an incomplete and potentially misleading picture.
By Juan Felipe Gomez, Bogdan Kulynych, Georgios Kaissis, Flavio P. Calmon, Jamie Hayes, Borja Balle, Antti Honkela