arXiv:2608.28934v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Differential privacy (DP) has traditionally been used to provide theoretical upper bounds on an algorithm's stability to changing its training data. In...
By Saloni Modi, Srivi Balaji, Yusong Zhu, Gautam Kamath, Kevin Tian
arXiv:2609.39629v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Differential privacy (DP) in machine learning is typically achieved by adding noise to model parameters (private learning) or to model outputs (private...
By Mihnea Ghitu, Matthew Wicker
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
arXiv:2307. 13127v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Data used to train predictive models via empirical risk minimization (ERM) often contain sensitive personal information.
By Spencer Giddens, Yiwang Zhou, Kevin R. Krull, Tara M. Brinkman, Peter X. K. Song, Fang Liu
The paper investigates black-box privacy auditing for differentially private learning algorithms, focusing on DP‑SGD. It introduces a method that optimizes the auditor’s canary set using metagradient descent, improving empirical lower bounds on privacy parameters compared to prior canary designs. The approach is shown to be DP‑SGD agnostic and efficient, with optimized canaries for small models remaining effective for larger DP‑SGD models.
By Matteo Boglioni, Terrance Liu, Andrew Ilyas, Zhiwei Steven Wu
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