Improved Differentially Private Euclidean Distance Approximation

March 22, 2022 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐Ÿ› ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems

๐Ÿ‘ป CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Nina Mesing Stausholm arXiv ID 2203.11561 Category cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms Citations 13 Venue ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems Last Checked 3 months ago
Abstract
This work shows how to privately and more accurately estimate Euclidean distance between pairs of vectors. Input vectors $x$ and $y$ are mapped to differentially private sketches $x'$ and $y'$, from which one can estimate the distance between $x$ and $y$. Our estimator relies on the Sparser Johnson-Lindenstrauss constructions by Kane \& Nelson (Journal of the ACM 2014), which for any $0<ฮฑ,ฮฒ<1/2$ have optimal output dimension $k=ฮ˜(ฮฑ^{-2}\log(1/ฮฒ))$ and sparsity $s=O(ฮฑ^{-1}\log(1/ฮฒ))$. We combine the constructions of Kane \& Nelson with either the Laplace or the Gaussian mechanism from the differential privacy literature, depending on the privacy parameters $\varepsilon$ and $ฮด$. We also suggest a differentially private version of Fast Johnson-Lindenstrauss Transform (FJLT) by Ailon \& Chazelle (SIAM Journal of Computing 2009) which offers a tradeoff in speed for variance for certain parameters. We answer an open question by Kenthapadi et al.~(Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality 2013) by analyzing the privacy and utility guarantees of an estimator for Euclidean distance, relying on Laplacian rather than Gaussian noise. We prove that the Laplace mechanism yields lower variance than the Gaussian mechanism whenever $ฮด<ฮฒ^{O(1/ฮฑ)}$. Thus, our work poses an improvement over the work of Kenthapadi et al.~by giving a more efficient estimator with lower variance for sufficiently small $ฮด$. Our sketch also achieves \emph{pure} differential privacy as a neat side-effect of the Laplace mechanism rather than the \emph{approximate} differential privacy guarantee of the Gaussian mechanism, which may not be sufficiently strong for some settings.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Data Structures & Algorithms

Died the same way โ€” ๐Ÿ‘ป Ghosted