Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Walter McKelvie

Publications and source records attributed to Walter McKelvie.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Computation-Utility-Privacy Tradeoffs in Bayesian Estimation

Bayesian methods lie at the heart of modern data science and provide a powerful scaffolding for estimation in data-constrained settings and principled quantification and propagation of uncertainty. Yet in many real-world use cases where these methods are deployed, there is a natural need to preserve the privacy of the individuals whose data is being scrutinized. While a number of works have attempted to approach the problem of differentially private Bayesian estimation through either reasoning about the inherent privacy of the posterior distribution or privatizing off-the-shelf Bayesian methods, these works generally do not come with rigorous utility guarantees beyond low-dimensional settings. In fact, even for the prototypical tasks of Gaussian mean estimation and linear regression, it was unknown how close one could get to the Bayes-optimal error with a private algorithm, even in the simplest case where the unknown parameter comes from a Gaussian prior. In this work, we give the first efficient algorithms for both of these problems that achieve mean-squared error $(1+o(1))\mathrm{OPT}$ and additionally show that both tasks exhibit an intriguing computational-statistical gap. For Bayesian mean estimation, we prove that the excess risk achieved by our method is optimal among all efficient algorithms within the low-degree framework, yet is provably worse than what is achievable by an exponential-time algorithm. For linear regression, we prove a qualitatively similar lower bound. Our algorithms draw upon the privacy-to-robustness framework of arXiv:2212.05015, but with the curious twist that to achieve private Bayes-optimal estimation, we need to design sum-of-squares-based robust estimators for inherently non-robust objects like the empirical mean and OLS estimator. Along the way we also add to the sum-of-squares toolkit a new kind of constraint based on short-flat decompositions.

cs.DS↗

Improving Pearson's chi-squared test: hypothesis testing of distributions -- optimally

Pearson's chi-squared test, from 1900, is the standard statistical tool for "hypothesis testing on distributions": namely, given samples from an unknown distribution $Q$ that may or may not equal a hypothesis distribution $P$, we want to return "yes" if $P=Q$ and "no" if $P$ is far from $Q$. While the chi-squared test is easy to use, it has been known for a while that it is not "data efficient", it does not make the best use of its data. Precisely, for accuracy $ε$ and confidence $δ$, and given $n$ samples from the unknown distribution $Q$, a tester should return "yes" with probability $>1-δ$ when $P=Q$, and "no" with probability $>1-δ$ when $|P-Q|>ε$. The challenge is to find a tester with the \emph{best} tradeoff between $ε$, $δ$, and $n$. We introduce a new tester, efficiently computable and easy to use, which we hope will replace the chi-squared tester in practical use. Our tester is found via a new non-convex optimization framework that essentially seeks to "find the tester whose Chernoff bounds on its performance are as good as possible". This tester is $1+o(1)$ optimal, in that the number of samples $n$ needed by the tester is within $1+o(1)$ factor of the samples needed by \emph{any} tester, even non-linear testers (for the setting: accuracy $ε$, confidence $δ$, and hypothesis $P$). We complement this algorithmic framework with matching lower bounds saying, essentially, that "our tester is instance-optimal, even to $1+o(1)$ factors, to the degree that Chernoff bounds are tight". Our overall non-convex optimization framework extends well beyond the current problem and is of independent interest.

math.ST↗