Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3559613.3563194acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesccsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

Fisher Information as a Utility Metric for Frequency Estimation under Local Differential Privacy

Published: 07 November 2022 Publication History
  • Get Citation Alerts
  • Abstract

    Local Differential Privacy (LDP) is the de facto standard technique to ensure privacy for users whose data is collected by a data aggregator they do not necessarily trust. This necessarily involves a tradeoff between user privacy and aggregator utility, and an important question is to optimize utility (under a given metric) for a given privacy level. Unfortunately, existing utility metrics are either hard to optimize for, or they only indirectly relate to an aggregator's goal, leading to theoretically optimal protocols that are unsuitable in practice. In this paper, we introduce a new utility metric for when the aggregator tries to estimate the true data's distribution in a finite set. The new metric is based on Fisher information, which expresses the aggregators information gain through the protocol. We show that this metric relates to other utility metrics such as estimator accuracy and mutual information and to the LDP parameter \varepsilon. Furthermore, we show that under this metric, we can approximate the optimal protocols as \varepsilon \rightarrow 0 and \varepsilon \rightarrow \infty, and we show how the optimal protocol can be found for a fixed \varepsilon, although the latter is computationally infeasible for large input spaces.

    References

    [1]
    Apple Differential Privacy Team. 2017. Learning with Privacy at Scale.
    [2]
    Leighton Pate Barnes, Wei-Ning Chen, and Ayfer Özgür. 2020. Fisher information under local differential privacy. (2020). Preprint, arXiv:2005.10783.
    [3]
    Leighton Pate Barnes and Ayfer Özgür. 2021. Fisher Information and Mutual Information Constraints. (2021). Preprint, arXiv:2102.05802.
    [4]
    Bertrand S. Clarke and Andrew R. Barron. 1990. Entropy Risk and the Bayesian Central Limit Theorem. (1990). Technical Report #91--56, Department of Statistics, Purdue University.
    [5]
    Harald Cramér. 1999. Mathematical methods of statistics. Vol. 43. Princeton university press.
    [6]
    Bolin Ding, Janardhan Kulkarni, and Sergey Yekhanin. 2017. Collecting telemetry data privately. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 3571--3580.
    [7]
    Jiu Ding and Aihui Zhou. 2007. Eigenvalues of rank-one updated matrices with some applications. Applied Mathematics Letters, Vol. 20, 12 (2007), 1223--1226.
    [8]
    John C Duchi, Michael I Jordan, and Martin J Wainwright. 2013. Local privacy and statistical minimax rates. In 2013 IEEE 54th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE, 429--438.
    [9]
    Cynthia Dwork, Frank McSherry, Kobbi Nissim, and Adam Smith. 2006. Calibrating noise to sensitivity in private data analysis. In Theory of cryptography conference. Springer, 265--284.
    [10]
    Úlfar Erlingsson, Vasyl Pihur, and Aleksandra Korolova. 2014. Rappor: Randomized aggregatable privacy-preserving ordinal response. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC conference on computer and communications security. 1054--1067.
    [11]
    Jinyuan Jia and Neil Zhenqiang Gong. 2019. Calibrate: Frequency estimation and heavy hitter identification with local differential privacy via incorporating prior knowledge. In IEEE INFOCOM 2019-IEEE Conference on Computer Communications. IEEE, 2008--2016.
    [12]
    Peter Kairouz, Sewoong Oh, and Pramod Viswanath. 2014. Extremal mechanisms for local differential privacy. arXiv preprint arXiv:1407.1338 (2014).
    [13]
    Shiva Prasad Kasiviswanathan, Homin K Lee, Kobbi Nissim, Sofya Raskhodnikova, and Adam Smith. 2011. What can we learn privately? SIAM J. Comput., Vol. 40, 3 (2011), 793--826.
    [14]
    Milan Lopuha"a-Zwakenberg, Zitao Li, Boris vS korić, and Ninghui Li. 2020. Improving Frequency Estimation under Local Differential Privacy. In Proceedings of the 19th Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society. 123--135.
    [15]
    Milan Lopuha"a-Zwakenberg, Boris vS korić, and Ninghui Li. 2019. Information-theoretic metrics for Local Differential Privacy protocols. arXiv:1910.07826 (2019). Preprint.
    [16]
    Zhan Qin, Yin Yang, Ting Yu, Issa Khalil, Xiaokui Xiao, and Kui Ren. 2016. Heavy hitter estimation over set-valued data with local differential privacy. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. 192--203.
    [17]
    C Radhakrishna Rao. 1945. Information and the accuracy attainable in the estimation of statistical parameters. Reson. J. Sci. Educ, Vol. 20 (1945), 78--90.
    [18]
    Jack Sherman and Winifred J Morrison. 1950. Adjustment of an inverse matrix corresponding to a change in one element of a given matrix. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, Vol. 21, 1 (1950), 124--127.
    [19]
    Aad van der Vaart. 2000. Asymptotic statistics. Cambridge university press.
    [20]
    Shaowei Wang, Liusheng Huang, Pengzhan Wang, Yiwen Nie, Hongli Xu, Wei Yang, Xiang-Yang Li, and Chunming Qiao. 2016. Mutual information optimally local private discrete distribution estimation. arXiv:1607.08025 (2016).
    [21]
    Tianhao Wang, Jeremiah Blocki, Ninghui Li, and Somesh Jha. 2017. Locally Differentially Private Protocols for Frequency Estimation. In 26th USENIX Security Symposium, USENIX Security 2017, Vancouver, BC, Canada, August 16--18, 2017. 729--745. https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity17/technical-sessions/presentation/wang-tianhao
    [22]
    Tianhao Wang, Milan Lopuha"a -Zwakenberg, Zitao Li, Boris vSkorić, and Ninghui Li. 2020. Locally Differentially Private Frequency Estimation with Consistency. In 27th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, NDSS 2020, San Diego, California, USA, February 23--26, 2020. The Internet Society. https://www.ndss-symposium.org/ndss-paper/locally-differentially-private-frequency-estimation-with-consistency/
    [23]
    Stanley L Warner. 1965. Randomized response: A survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc., Vol. 60, 309 (1965), 63--69.
    [24]
    Mengmeng Yang, Lingjuan Lyu, Jun Zhao, Tianqing Zhu, and Kwok-Yan Lam. 2020. Local differential privacy and its applications: A comprehensive survey. arXiv:2008.03686 (2020). Preprint.
    [25]
    Min Ye and Alexander Barg. 2018. Optimal schemes for discrete distribution estimation under locally differential privacy. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Vol. 64, 8 (2018), 5662--5676. io

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2023)Learning from biased soft labelsProceedings of the 37th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems10.5555/3666122.3668725(59566-59584)Online publication date: 10-Dec-2023

    Index Terms

    1. Fisher Information as a Utility Metric for Frequency Estimation under Local Differential Privacy

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Information & Contributors

        Information

        Published In

        cover image ACM Conferences
        WPES'22: Proceedings of the 21st Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society
        November 2022
        227 pages
        ISBN:9781450398732
        DOI:10.1145/3559613
        This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

        Sponsors

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        Published: 07 November 2022

        Check for updates

        Author Tags

        1. fisher information
        2. local differential privacy
        3. optimalization
        4. utility metrics

        Qualifiers

        • Research-article

        Funding Sources

        Conference

        CCS '22
        Sponsor:

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate 106 of 355 submissions, 30%

        Upcoming Conference

        CCS '24
        ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security
        October 14 - 18, 2024
        Salt Lake City , UT , USA

        Contributors

        Other Metrics

        Bibliometrics & Citations

        Bibliometrics

        Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)134
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)13

        Other Metrics

        Citations

        Cited By

        View all
        • (2023)Learning from biased soft labelsProceedings of the 37th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems10.5555/3666122.3668725(59566-59584)Online publication date: 10-Dec-2023

        View Options

        View options

        PDF

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        Get Access

        Login options

        Media

        Figures

        Other

        Tables

        Share

        Share

        Share this Publication link

        Share on social media