30
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Learning with Differential Privacy: Stability, Learnability and the Sufficiency and Necessity of ERM Principle

      Preprint

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          While machine learning has proven to be a powerful data-driven solution to many real-life problems, its use in sensitive domains has been limited due to privacy concerns. A popular approach known as **differential privacy** offers provable privacy guarantees, but it is often observed in practice that it could substantially hamper learning accuracy. In this paper we study the learnability (whether a problem can be learned by any algorithm) under Vapnik's general learning setting with differential privacy constraint, and reveal some intricate relationships between privacy, stability and learnability. In particular, we show that a problem is privately learnable **if an only if** there is a private algorithm that asymptotically minimizes the empirical risk (AERM). In contrast, for non-private learning AERM alone is not sufficient for learnability. This result suggests that when searching for private learning algorithms, we can restrict the search to algorithms that are AERM. In light of this, we propose a conceptual procedure that always finds a universally consistent algorithm whenever the problem is learnable under privacy constraint. We also propose a generic and practical algorithm and show that under very general conditions it privately learns a wide class of learning problems. Lastly, we extend some of the results to the more practical \((\epsilon,\delta)\)-differential privacy and establish the existence of a phase-transition on the class of problems that are approximately privately learnable with respect to how small \(\delta\) needs to be.

          Related collections

          Most cited references6

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          What Can We Learn Privately?

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Conference Proceedings: not found

            Mechanism Design via Differential Privacy

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Algorithmic stability and sanity-check bounds for leave-one-out cross-validation.

              In this article we prove sanity-check bounds for the error of the leave-one-out cross-validation estimate of the generalization error: that is, bounds showing that the worst-case error of this estimate is not much worse than that of the training error estimate. The name sanity check refers to the fact that although we often expect the leave-one-out estimate to perform considerably better than the training error estimate, we are here only seeking assurance that its performance will not be considerably worse. Perhaps surprisingly, such assurance has been given only for limited cases in the prior literature on cross-validation. Any nontrivial bound on the error of leave-one-out must rely on some notion of algorithmic stability. Previous bounds relied on the rather strong notion of hypothesis stability, whose application was primarily limited to nearest-neighbor and other local algorithms. Here we introduce the new and weaker notion of error stability and apply it to obtain sanity-check bounds for leave-one-out for other classes of learning algorithms, including training error minimization procedures and Bayesian algorithms. We also provide lower bounds demonstrating the necessity of some form of error stability for proving bounds on the error of the leave-one-out estimate, and the fact that for training error minimization algorithms, in the worst case such bounds must still depend on the Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension of the hypothesis class.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                1502.06309
                http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/

                Security & Cryptology,Machine learning,Artificial intelligence
                Security & Cryptology, Machine learning, Artificial intelligence

                Comments

                Comment on this article