SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2309.06068

Private Distribution Testing with Heterogeneous Constraints: Your Epsilon Might Not Be Mine

Abstract

Private closeness testing asks to decide whether the underlying probability distributions of two sensitive datasets are identical or differ significantly in statistical distance, while guaranteeing (differential) privacy of the data. As in most (if not all) distribution testing questions studied under privacy constraints, however, previous work assumes that the two datasets are equally sensitive, i.e., must be provided the same privacy guarantees. This is often an unrealistic assumption, as different sources of data come with different privacy requirements; as a result, known closeness testing algorithms might be unnecessarily conservative, "paying" too high a privacy budget for half of the data. In this work, we initiate the study of the closeness testing problem under heterogeneous privacy constraints, where the two datasets come with distinct privacy requirements. We formalize the question and provide algorithms under the three most widely used differential privacy settings, with a particular focus on the local and shuffle models of privacy; and show that one can indeed achieve better sample efficiency when taking into account the two different "epsilon" requirements.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Clément L. Canonne, Yucheng Sun. 2023-09-12. Private Distribution Testing with Heterogeneous Constraints: Your Epsilon Might Not Be Mine. https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.06068

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Quasi-Monte Carlo Beyond Hardy-Krause II: $(1 + \varepsilon)n$ Samples Suffice

Numerical integration studies how well one can estimate the integral of a function $f$ over $[0,1)^d$ using $n$ sample points. The two classical methods, Monte Carlo (MC) and quasi-Monte Carlo (QMC), have complementary strengths and weaknesses, and a fundamental question is to design an approach that combines the benefits of both. Recently, building on the transference principle in discrepancy theory, Bansal and Jiang~\cite{BJ25a} gave a randomized QMC method that bridges MC and QMC guarantees using only i.i.d.\ samples. Their method also goes beyond the classical Koksma--Hlawka inequality: it achieves integration error $\widetilde{O}_d(\sigma_{\mathsf{SO}}(f)/n)$, where the smoothed-out variation $\sigma_{\mathsf{SO}}(f)$ can be substantially smaller than the Hardy--Krause variation that governs the classical bound. However, their algorithm requires $n^2$ i.i.d.\ samples as input, and this quadratic blowup is inherent to any method based on the transference principle. In this work, we bypass the quadratic blowup: for any constant $\varepsilon > 0$, we show that $(1+\varepsilon)n$ i.i.d.\ samples suffice to both obtain the beyond-Hardy--Krause guarantee of~\cite{BJ25a}, resolving an open problem posed there, and to produce low-discrepancy point sequences. Our algorithms are variants of the online Haar-thinning method of Dwivedi, Feldheim, Gurel-Gurevich, and Ramdas~\cite{DFG+19}.

cs.DS

Single-Exponential Algorithms and a Polynomial Kernel for Strong Connectivity Augmentation

Strong Connectivity Augmentation (SCA) asks whether a directed acyclic graph can be made strongly connected by adding at most $k$ prescribed links whose total weight is within a given budget. Klinkby, Misra, and Saurabh (SODA 2021) gave an $O^*(2^{O(k\log k)})$-time algorithm and asked whether the problem admits a single-exponential parameterized algorithm and a polynomial kernel. We answer both questions affirmatively: SCA can be solved in $O^*(9^k)$ time and admits a polynomial kernel with $O(k^4)$ vertices and $O(k^{16})$ bits. For unweighted SCA, we obtain $O^*(4^k)$ time and a kernel with $O(k^3)$ vertices. Our algorithms are based on a particularly simple reduction to Strongly Connected Spanning Subgraph with two edge costs.

cs.DS