AIOct 5, 2023
Artificial Intelligence Index Report 2023Nestor Maslej, Loredana Fattorini, Erik Brynjolfsson et al. · salesforce, stanford
Welcome to the sixth edition of the AI Index Report. This year, the report introduces more original data than any previous edition, including a new chapter on AI public opinion, a more thorough technical performance chapter, original analysis about large language and multimodal models, detailed trends in global AI legislation records, a study of the environmental impact of AI systems, and more. The AI Index Report tracks, collates, distills, and visualizes data related to artificial intelligence. Our mission is to provide unbiased, rigorously vetted, broadly sourced data in order for policymakers, researchers, executives, journalists, and the general public to develop a more thorough and nuanced understanding of the complex field of AI. The report aims to be the world's most credible and authoritative source for data and insights about AI.
LGMay 28
Fair Decisions from Calibrated Scores: Achieving Optimal Classification While Satisfying SufficiencyEtam Benger, Katrina Ligett
Binary classification based on predicted probabilities (scores) is a fundamental task in supervised machine learning. While thresholding scores is Bayes-optimal in the unconstrained setting, using a single threshold generally violates statistical group fairness constraints. Under independence (statistical parity) and separation (equalized odds), such thresholding suffices when the scores already satisfy the corresponding criterion. However, this does not extend to sufficiency: even perfectly group-calibrated scores -- including true class probabilities -- violate predictive parity after thresholding. In this work, we present an exact solution for optimal binary (randomized) classification under sufficiency, assuming finite sets of group-calibrated scores. We provide a geometric characterization of the feasible pairs of positive predictive value (PPV) and false omission rate (FOR) achievable by such classifiers, and use it to derive a simple post-processing algorithm that attains the optimal classifier using only group-calibrated scores and group membership. Finally, since sufficiency and separation are generally incompatible, we identify the classifier that minimizes deviation from separation subject to sufficiency, and show that it can also be obtained by our algorithm, often achieving performance comparable to the optimum.
LGMay 28
The Fast Mixing Mechanism for Differential PrivacyOmri Lev, Moshe Shenfeld, Vishwak Srinivasan et al.
Randomized sketching is a central tool for compressing large-scale optimization problems while preserving accuracy. In particular, sketches that are based on structured matrices, such as the Hadamard matrix, can be applied efficiently and often yield solutions that approximate those of the original problem at much lower computational cost. In differential privacy (DP), Gaussian sketching has been used to solve DP linear regression, beginning with \citet{sheffet2017differentially, sheffet2019old} and later refined by \citet{lev2025gaussianmix, lev2026near}. However, although these methods achieve strong utility guarantees, they usually do not improve runtime over classical DP approaches. In this work, we introduce a new DP sketching mechanism based on fast transforms, which, in certain cases, matches the runtime of classical fast sketching methods. We prove state-of-the-art privacy guarantees for this mechanism and show that, in favorable regimes, they match those of the Gaussian sketch up to a constant factor. As an application, we combine this mechanism with recent sketch-based methods for DP linear regression to obtain a new algorithm with strong utility and improved runtime. We establish privacy and accuracy guarantees for this algorithm, yielding, to the best of our knowledge, the first fast method for DP ordinary least squares.
LGJan 12
Near-Optimal Private Linear Regression via Iterative Hessian MixingOmri Lev, Moshe Shenfeld, Vishwak Srinivasan et al.
We study differentially private ordinary least squares (DP-OLS) with bounded data. The dominant approach, adaptive sufficient-statistics perturbation (AdaSSP), adds an adaptively chosen perturbation to the sufficient statistics, namely, the matrix $X^{\top}X$ and the vector $X^{\top}Y$, and is known to achieve near-optimal accuracy and to have strong empirical performance. In contrast, methods that rely on Gaussian-sketching, which ensure differential privacy by pre-multiplying the data with a random Gaussian matrix, are widely used in federated and distributed regression, yet remain relatively uncommon for DP-OLS. In this work, we introduce the iterative Hessian mixing, a novel DP-OLS algorithm that relies on Gaussian sketches and is inspired by the iterative Hessian sketch algorithm. We provide utility analysis for the iterative Hessian mixing as well as a new analysis for the previous methods that rely on Gaussian sketches. Then, we show that our new approach circumvents the intrinsic limitations of the prior methods and provides non-trivial improvements over AdaSSP. We conclude by running an extensive set of experiments across standard benchmarks to demonstrate further that our approach consistently outperforms these prior baselines.
CRNov 3, 2025
Black-Box Differentially Private Nonparametric Confidence Intervals Under Minimal AssumptionsTomer Shoham, Moshe Shenfeld, Noa Velner-Harris et al.
We introduce a simple, general framework that takes any differentially private estimator of any arbitrary quantity as a black box, and from it constructs a differentially private nonparametric confidence interval of that quantity. Our approach repeatedly subsamples the data, applies the private estimator to each subsample, and then post-processes the resulting empirical CDF to a confidence interval. Our analysis uses the randomness from the subsampling to achieve privacy amplification. Under mild assumptions, the empirical CDF we obtain approaches the CDF of the private statistic as the sample size grows. We use this to show that the confidence intervals we estimate are asymptotically valid, tight, and equivalent to their non-private counterparts. We provide empirical evidence that our method performs well compared with the (less-general) state-of-the-art algorithms.
AIApr 8, 2025
Artificial Intelligence Index Report 2025Nestor Maslej, Loredana Fattorini, Raymond Perrault et al. · salesforce, stanford
Welcome to the eighth edition of the AI Index report. The 2025 Index is our most comprehensive to date and arrives at an important moment, as AI's influence across society, the economy, and global governance continues to intensify. New in this year's report are in-depth analyses of the evolving landscape of AI hardware, novel estimates of inference costs, and new analyses of AI publication and patenting trends. We also introduce fresh data on corporate adoption of responsible AI practices, along with expanded coverage of AI's growing role in science and medicine. Since its founding in 2017 as an offshoot of the One Hundred Year Study of Artificial Intelligence, the AI Index has been committed to equipping policymakers, journalists, executives, researchers, and the public with accurate, rigorously validated, and globally sourced data. Our mission has always been to help these stakeholders make better-informed decisions about the development and deployment of AI. In a world where AI is discussed everywhere - from boardrooms to kitchen tables - this mission has never been more essential. The AI Index continues to lead in tracking and interpreting the most critical trends shaping the field - from the shifting geopolitical landscape and the rapid evolution of underlying technologies, to AI's expanding role in business, policymaking, and public life. Longitudinal tracking remains at the heart of our mission. In a domain advancing at breakneck speed, the Index provides essential context - helping us understand where AI stands today, how it got here, and where it may be headed next. Recognized globally as one of the most authoritative resources on artificial intelligence, the AI Index has been cited in major media outlets such as The New York Times, Bloomberg, and The Guardian; referenced in hundreds of academic papers; and used by policymakers and government agencies around the world.
CYNov 21, 2024
The Global AI Vibrancy ToolLoredana Fattorini, Nestor Maslej, Raymond Perrault et al.
This paper presents the latest version of the Global AI Vibrancy Tool (GVT), an interactive suite of visualizations designed to facilitate the comparison of AI vibrancy across 36 countries, using 42 indicators organized into 8 pillars. The tool offers customizable features that allow users to conduct in-depth country-level comparisons and longitudinal analyses of AI-related metrics, all based on publicly available data. By providing a transparent assessment of national progress in AI, it serves the diverse needs of policymakers, industry leaders, researchers, and the general public. Using weights for indicators and pillars developed by AI Index's panel of experts and combined into an index, the Global AI Vibrancy Ranking for 2023 places the United States first by a significant margin, followed by China and the United Kingdom. The ranking also highlights the rise of smaller nations such as Singapore when evaluated on both absolute and per capita bases. The tool offers three sub-indices for evaluating Global AI Vibrancy along different dimensions: the Innovation Index, the Economic Competitiveness Index, and the Policy, Governance, and Public Engagement Index.
LGMar 10, 2025
How Well Can Differential Privacy Be Audited in One Run?Amit Keinan, Moshe Shenfeld, Katrina Ligett
Recent methods for auditing the privacy of machine learning algorithms have improved computational efficiency by simultaneously intervening on multiple training examples in a single training run. Steinke et al. (2024) prove that one-run auditing indeed lower bounds the true privacy parameter of the audited algorithm, and give impressive empirical results. Their work leaves open the question of how precisely one-run auditing can uncover the true privacy parameter of an algorithm, and how that precision depends on the audited algorithm. In this work, we characterize the maximum achievable efficacy of one-run auditing and show that the key barrier to its efficacy is interference between the observable effects of different data elements. We present new conceptual approaches to minimize this barrier, towards improving the performance of one-run auditing of real machine learning algorithms.
LGMay 30, 2025
The Gaussian Mixing Mechanism: Renyi Differential Privacy via Gaussian SketchesOmri Lev, Vishwak Srinivasan, Moshe Shenfeld et al.
Gaussian sketching, which consists of pre-multiplying the data with a random Gaussian matrix, is a widely used technique for multiple problems in data science and machine learning, with applications spanning computationally efficient optimization, coded computing, and federated learning. This operation also provides differential privacy guarantees due to its inherent randomness. In this work, we revisit this operation through the lens of Renyi Differential Privacy (RDP), providing a refined privacy analysis that yields significantly tighter bounds than prior results. We then demonstrate how this improved analysis leads to performance improvement in different linear regression settings, establishing theoretical utility guarantees. Empirically, our methods improve performance across multiple datasets and, in several cases, reduce runtime.
LGJun 20, 2021
Generalization in the Face of Adaptivity: A Bayesian PerspectiveMoshe Shenfeld, Katrina Ligett
Repeated use of a data sample via adaptively chosen queries can rapidly lead to overfitting, wherein the empirical evaluation of queries on the sample significantly deviates from their mean with respect to the underlying data distribution. It turns out that simple noise addition algorithms suffice to prevent this issue, and differential privacy-based analysis of these algorithms shows that they can handle an asymptotically optimal number of queries. However, differential privacy's worst-case nature entails scaling such noise to the range of the queries even for highly-concentrated queries, or introducing more complex algorithms. In this paper, we prove that straightforward noise-addition algorithms already provide variance-dependent guarantees that also extend to unbounded queries. This improvement stems from a novel characterization that illuminates the core problem of adaptive data analysis. We show that the harm of adaptivity results from the covariance between the new query and a Bayes factor-based measure of how much information about the data sample was encoded in the responses given to past queries. We then leverage this characterization to introduce a new data-dependent stability notion that can bound this covariance.
LGFeb 17, 2020
Gaming Helps! Learning from Strategic Interactions in Natural DynamicsYahav Bechavod, Katrina Ligett, Zhiwei Steven Wu et al.
We consider an online regression setting in which individuals adapt to the regression model: arriving individuals are aware of the current model, and invest strategically in modifying their own features so as to improve the predicted score that the current model assigns to them. Such feature manipulation has been observed in various scenarios -- from credit assessment to school admissions -- posing a challenge for the learner. Surprisingly, we find that such strategic manipulations may in fact help the learner recover the meaningful variables -- that is, the features that, when changed, affect the true label (as opposed to non-meaningful features that have no effect). We show that even simple behavior on the learner's part allows her to simultaneously i) accurately recover the meaningful features, and ii) incentivize agents to invest in these meaningful features, providing incentives for improvement.
LGFeb 13, 2020
Learn to Expect the Unexpected: Probably Approximately Correct Domain GeneralizationVikas K. Garg, Adam Kalai, Katrina Ligett et al.
Domain generalization is the problem of machine learning when the training data and the test data come from different data domains. We present a simple theoretical model of learning to generalize across domains in which there is a meta-distribution over data distributions, and those data distributions may even have different supports. In our model, the training data given to a learning algorithm consists of multiple datasets each from a single domain drawn in turn from the meta-distribution. We study this model in three different problem settings---a multi-domain Massart noise setting, a decision tree multi-dataset setting, and a feature selection setting, and find that computationally efficient, polynomial-sample domain generalization is possible in each. Experiments demonstrate that our feature selection algorithm indeed ignores spurious correlations and improves generalization.
DSNov 22, 2019
Privately Learning Thresholds: Closing the Exponential GapHaim Kaplan, Katrina Ligett, Yishay Mansour et al.
We study the sample complexity of learning threshold functions under the constraint of differential privacy. It is assumed that each labeled example in the training data is the information of one individual and we would like to come up with a generalizing hypothesis $h$ while guaranteeing differential privacy for the individuals. Intuitively, this means that any single labeled example in the training data should not have a significant effect on the choice of the hypothesis. This problem has received much attention recently; unlike the non-private case, where the sample complexity is independent of the domain size and just depends on the desired accuracy and confidence, for private learning the sample complexity must depend on the domain size $X$ (even for approximate differential privacy). Alon et al. (STOC 2019) showed a lower bound of $Ω(\log^*|X|)$ on the sample complexity and Bun et al. (FOCS 2015) presented an approximate-private learner with sample complexity $\tilde{O}\left(2^{\log^*|X|}\right)$. In this work we reduce this gap significantly, almost settling the sample complexity. We first present a new upper bound (algorithm) of $\tilde{O}\left(\left(\log^*|X|\right)^2\right)$ on the sample complexity and then present an improved version with sample complexity $\tilde{O}\left(\left(\log^*|X|\right)^{1.5}\right)$. Our algorithm is constructed for the related interior point problem, where the goal is to find a point between the largest and smallest input elements. It is based on selecting an input-dependent hash function and using it to embed the database into a domain whose size is reduced logarithmically; this results in a new database, an interior point of which can be used to generate an interior point in the original database in a differentially private manner.
LGSep 9, 2019
A New Analysis of Differential Privacy's Generalization GuaranteesChristopher Jung, Katrina Ligett, Seth Neel et al.
We give a new proof of the "transfer theorem" underlying adaptive data analysis: that any mechanism for answering adaptively chosen statistical queries that is differentially private and sample-accurate is also accurate out-of-sample. Our new proof is elementary and gives structural insights that we expect will be useful elsewhere. We show: 1) that differential privacy ensures that the expectation of any query on the posterior distribution on datasets induced by the transcript of the interaction is close to its true value on the data distribution, and 2) sample accuracy on its own ensures that any query answer produced by the mechanism is close to its posterior expectation with high probability. This second claim follows from a thought experiment in which we imagine that the dataset is resampled from the posterior distribution after the mechanism has committed to its answers. The transfer theorem then follows by summing these two bounds, and in particular, avoids the "monitor argument" used to derive high probability bounds in prior work. An upshot of our new proof technique is that the concrete bounds we obtain are substantially better than the best previously known bounds, even though the improvements are in the constants, rather than the asymptotics (which are known to be tight). As we show, our new bounds outperform the naive "sample-splitting" baseline at dramatically smaller dataset sizes compared to the previous state of the art, bringing techniques from this literature closer to practicality.
LGJun 3, 2019
A necessary and sufficient stability notion for adaptive generalizationKatrina Ligett, Moshe Shenfeld
We introduce a new notion of the stability of computations, which holds under post-processing and adaptive composition. We show that the notion is both necessary and sufficient to ensure generalization in the face of adaptivity, for any computations that respond to bounded-sensitivity linear queries while providing accuracy with respect to the data sample set. The stability notion is based on quantifying the effect of observing a computation's outputs on the posterior over the data sample elements. We show a separation between this stability notion and previously studied notion and observe that all differentially private algorithms also satisfy this notion.
LGApr 26, 2019
Learning to Prune: Speeding up Repeated ComputationsDaniel Alabi, Adam Tauman Kalai, Katrina Ligett et al.
It is common to encounter situations where one must solve a sequence of similar computational problems. Running a standard algorithm with worst-case runtime guarantees on each instance will fail to take advantage of valuable structure shared across the problem instances. For example, when a commuter drives from work to home, there are typically only a handful of routes that will ever be the shortest path. A naive algorithm that does not exploit this common structure may spend most of its time checking roads that will never be in the shortest path. More generally, we can often ignore large swaths of the search space that will likely never contain an optimal solution. We present an algorithm that learns to maximally prune the search space on repeated computations, thereby reducing runtime while provably outputting the correct solution each period with high probability. Our algorithm employs a simple explore-exploit technique resembling those used in online algorithms, though our setting is quite different. We prove that, with respect to our model of pruning search spaces, our approach is optimal up to constant factors. Finally, we illustrate the applicability of our model and algorithm to three classic problems: shortest-path routing, string search, and linear programming. We present experiments confirming that our simple algorithm is effective at significantly reducing the runtime of solving repeated computations.
LGFeb 6, 2019
Equal Opportunity in Online Classification with Partial FeedbackYahav Bechavod, Katrina Ligett, Aaron Roth et al.
We study an online classification problem with partial feedback in which individuals arrive one at a time from a fixed but unknown distribution, and must be classified as positive or negative. Our algorithm only observes the true label of an individual if they are given a positive classification. This setting captures many classification problems for which fairness is a concern: for example, in criminal recidivism prediction, recidivism is only observed if the inmate is released; in lending applications, loan repayment is only observed if the loan is granted. We require that our algorithms satisfy common statistical fairness constraints (such as equalizing false positive or negative rates -- introduced as "equal opportunity" in Hardt et al. (2016)) at every round, with respect to the underlying distribution. We give upper and lower bounds characterizing the cost of this constraint in terms of the regret rate (and show that it is mild), and give an oracle efficient algorithm that achieves the upper bound.
LGJun 30, 2017
Penalizing Unfairness in Binary ClassificationYahav Bechavod, Katrina Ligett
We present a new approach for mitigating unfairness in learned classifiers. In particular, we focus on binary classification tasks over individuals from two populations, where, as our criterion for fairness, we wish to achieve similar false positive rates in both populations, and similar false negative rates in both populations. As a proof of concept, we implement our approach and empirically evaluate its ability to achieve both fairness and accuracy, using datasets from the fields of criminal risk assessment, credit, lending, and college admissions.
LGMay 30, 2017
Accuracy First: Selecting a Differential Privacy Level for Accuracy-Constrained ERMKatrina Ligett, Seth Neel, Aaron Roth et al.
Traditional approaches to differential privacy assume a fixed privacy requirement $ε$ for a computation, and attempt to maximize the accuracy of the computation subject to the privacy constraint. As differential privacy is increasingly deployed in practical settings, it may often be that there is instead a fixed accuracy requirement for a given computation and the data analyst would like to maximize the privacy of the computation subject to the accuracy constraint. This raises the question of how to find and run a maximally private empirical risk minimizer subject to a given accuracy requirement. We propose a general "noise reduction" framework that can apply to a variety of private empirical risk minimization (ERM) algorithms, using them to "search" the space of privacy levels to find the empirically strongest one that meets the accuracy constraint, incurring only logarithmic overhead in the number of privacy levels searched. The privacy analysis of our algorithm leads naturally to a version of differential privacy where the privacy parameters are dependent on the data, which we term ex-post privacy, and which is related to the recently introduced notion of privacy odometers. We also give an ex-post privacy analysis of the classical AboveThreshold privacy tool, modifying it to allow for queries chosen depending on the database. Finally, we apply our approach to two common objectives, regularized linear and logistic regression, and empirically compare our noise reduction methods to (i) inverting the theoretical utility guarantees of standard private ERM algorithms and (ii) a stronger, empirical baseline based on binary search.
DSFeb 24, 2016
Adaptive Learning with Robust Generalization GuaranteesRachel Cummings, Katrina Ligett, Kobbi Nissim et al.
The traditional notion of generalization---i.e., learning a hypothesis whose empirical error is close to its true error---is surprisingly brittle. As has recently been noted in [DFH+15b], even if several algorithms have this guarantee in isolation, the guarantee need not hold if the algorithms are composed adaptively. In this paper, we study three notions of generalization---increasing in strength---that are robust to postprocessing and amenable to adaptive composition, and examine the relationships between them. We call the weakest such notion Robust Generalization. A second, intermediate, notion is the stability guarantee known as differential privacy. The strongest guarantee we consider we call Perfect Generalization. We prove that every hypothesis class that is PAC learnable is also PAC learnable in a robustly generalizing fashion, with almost the same sample complexity. It was previously known that differentially private algorithms satisfy robust generalization. In this paper, we show that robust generalization is a strictly weaker concept, and that there is a learning task that can be carried out subject to robust generalization guarantees, yet cannot be carried out subject to differential privacy. We also show that perfect generalization is a strictly stronger guarantee than differential privacy, but that, nevertheless, many learning tasks can be carried out subject to the guarantees of perfect generalization.
GTJun 10, 2015
Truthful Linear RegressionRachel Cummings, Stratis Ioannidis, Katrina Ligett
We consider the problem of fitting a linear model to data held by individuals who are concerned about their privacy. Incentivizing most players to truthfully report their data to the analyst constrains our design to mechanisms that provide a privacy guarantee to the participants; we use differential privacy to model individuals' privacy losses. This immediately poses a problem, as differentially private computation of a linear model necessarily produces a biased estimation, and existing approaches to design mechanisms to elicit data from privacy-sensitive individuals do not generalize well to biased estimators. We overcome this challenge through an appropriate design of the computation and payment scheme.
GTApr 24, 2014
Buying Private Data without VerificationArpita Ghosh, Katrina Ligett, Aaron Roth et al.
We consider the problem of designing a survey to aggregate non-verifiable information from a privacy-sensitive population: an analyst wants to compute some aggregate statistic from the private bits held by each member of a population, but cannot verify the correctness of the bits reported by participants in his survey. Individuals in the population are strategic agents with a cost for privacy, \ie, they not only account for the payments they expect to receive from the mechanism, but also their privacy costs from any information revealed about them by the mechanism's outcome---the computed statistic as well as the payments---to determine their utilities. How can the analyst design payments to obtain an accurate estimate of the population statistic when individuals strategically decide both whether to participate and whether to truthfully report their sensitive information? We design a differentially private peer-prediction mechanism that supports accurate estimation of the population statistic as a Bayes-Nash equilibrium in settings where agents have explicit preferences for privacy. The mechanism requires knowledge of the marginal prior distribution on bits $b_i$, but does not need full knowledge of the marginal distribution on the costs $c_i$, instead requiring only an approximate upper bound. Our mechanism guarantees $ε$-differential privacy to each agent $i$ against any adversary who can observe the statistical estimate output by the mechanism, as well as the payments made to the $n-1$ other agents $j\neq i$. Finally, we show that with slightly more structured assumptions on the privacy cost functions of each agent, the cost of running the survey goes to $0$ as the number of agents diverges.
GTFeb 21, 2012
Take it or Leave it: Running a Survey when Privacy Comes at a CostKatrina Ligett, Aaron Roth
In this paper, we consider the problem of estimating a potentially sensitive (individually stigmatizing) statistic on a population. In our model, individuals are concerned about their privacy, and experience some cost as a function of their privacy loss. Nevertheless, they would be willing to participate in the survey if they were compensated for their privacy cost. These cost functions are not publicly known, however, nor do we make Bayesian assumptions about their form or distribution. Individuals are rational and will misreport their costs for privacy if doing so is in their best interest. Ghosh and Roth recently showed in this setting, when costs for privacy loss may be correlated with private types, if individuals value differential privacy, no individually rational direct revelation mechanism can compute any non-trivial estimate of the population statistic. In this paper, we circumvent this impossibility result by proposing a modified notion of how individuals experience cost as a function of their privacy loss, and by giving a mechanism which does not operate by direct revelation. Instead, our mechanism has the ability to randomly approach individuals from a population and offer them a take-it-or-leave-it offer. This is intended to model the abilities of a surveyor who may stand on a street corner and approach passers-by.