33.6DSJul 25, 2024
Improving Online Algorithms via ML PredictionsRavi Kumar, Manish Purohit, Zoya Svitkina
In this work we study the problem of using machine-learned predictions to improve the performance of online algorithms. We consider two classical problems, ski rental and non-clairvoyant job scheduling, and obtain new online algorithms that use predictions to make their decisions. These algorithms are oblivious to the performance of the predictor, improve with better predictions, but do not degrade much if the predictions are poor.
11.7DSSep 21, 2023
User-Level Differential Privacy With Few Examples Per UserBadih Ghazi, Pritish Kamath, Ravi Kumar et al.
Previous work on user-level differential privacy (DP) [Ghazi et al. NeurIPS 2021, Bun et al. STOC 2023] obtained generic algorithms that work for various learning tasks. However, their focus was on the example-rich regime, where the users have so many examples that each user could themselves solve the problem. In this work we consider the example-scarce regime, where each user has only a few examples, and obtain the following results: 1. For approximate-DP, we give a generic transformation of any item-level DP algorithm to a user-level DP algorithm. Roughly speaking, the latter gives a (multiplicative) savings of $O_{\varepsilon,δ}(\sqrt{m})$ in terms of the number of users required for achieving the same utility, where $m$ is the number of examples per user. This algorithm, while recovering most known bounds for specific problems, also gives new bounds, e.g., for PAC learning. 2. For pure-DP, we present a simple technique for adapting the exponential mechanism [McSherry, Talwar FOCS 2007] to the user-level setting. This gives new bounds for a variety of tasks, such as private PAC learning, hypothesis selection, and distribution learning. For some of these problems, we show that our bounds are near-optimal.
11.5LGJun 27, 2023
Ticketed Learning-Unlearning SchemesBadih Ghazi, Pritish Kamath, Ravi Kumar et al.
We consider the learning--unlearning paradigm defined as follows. First given a dataset, the goal is to learn a good predictor, such as one minimizing a certain loss. Subsequently, given any subset of examples that wish to be unlearnt, the goal is to learn, without the knowledge of the original training dataset, a good predictor that is identical to the predictor that would have been produced when learning from scratch on the surviving examples. We propose a new ticketed model for learning--unlearning wherein the learning algorithm can send back additional information in the form of a small-sized (encrypted) ``ticket'' to each participating training example, in addition to retaining a small amount of ``central'' information for later. Subsequently, the examples that wish to be unlearnt present their tickets to the unlearning algorithm, which additionally uses the central information to return a new predictor. We provide space-efficient ticketed learning--unlearning schemes for a broad family of concept classes, including thresholds, parities, intersection-closed classes, among others. En route, we introduce the count-to-zero problem, where during unlearning, the goal is to simply know if there are any examples that survived. We give a ticketed learning--unlearning scheme for this problem that relies on the construction of Sperner families with certain properties, which might be of independent interest.
10.7LGNov 14, 2023
Sparsity-Preserving Differentially Private Training of Large Embedding ModelsBadih Ghazi, Yangsibo Huang, Pritish Kamath et al.
As the use of large embedding models in recommendation systems and language applications increases, concerns over user data privacy have also risen. DP-SGD, a training algorithm that combines differential privacy with stochastic gradient descent, has been the workhorse in protecting user privacy without compromising model accuracy by much. However, applying DP-SGD naively to embedding models can destroy gradient sparsity, leading to reduced training efficiency. To address this issue, we present two new algorithms, DP-FEST and DP-AdaFEST, that preserve gradient sparsity during private training of large embedding models. Our algorithms achieve substantial reductions ($10^6 \times$) in gradient size, while maintaining comparable levels of accuracy, on benchmark real-world datasets.
27.5CLOct 30, 2024Code
On Memorization of Large Language Models in Logical ReasoningChulin Xie, Yangsibo Huang, Chiyuan Zhang et al.
Large language models (LLMs) achieve good performance on challenging reasoning benchmarks, yet could also make basic reasoning mistakes. This contrasting behavior is puzzling when it comes to understanding the mechanisms behind LLMs' reasoning capabilities. One hypothesis is that the increasingly high and nearly saturated performance on common reasoning benchmarks could be due to the memorization of similar problems. In this paper, we systematically investigate this hypothesis with a quantitative measurement of memorization in reasoning tasks, using a dynamically generated logical reasoning benchmark based on Knights and Knaves (K&K) puzzles. We find that LLMs could interpolate and memorize the training puzzles (achieving near-perfect accuracy) after fine-tuning, yet they struggle with slight variations of these puzzles. On the other hand, we show that while fine-tuning leads to heavy memorization, it also consistently improves generalization performance. Through in-depth analyses with perturbation tests, cross difficulty-level transferability, probing model internals, and fine-tuning with wrong answers, we establish that LLMs develop reasoning skills on K&K puzzles alongside memorization. Finally, our analysis based on a per-sample memorization score sheds light on how LLMs switch between reasoning and memorization when solving logical puzzles. Our code and data are available at https://memkklogic.github.io.
22.0LGMar 26, 2024Code
How Private are DP-SGD Implementations?Lynn Chua, Badih Ghazi, Pritish Kamath et al.
We demonstrate a substantial gap between the privacy guarantees of the Adaptive Batch Linear Queries (ABLQ) mechanism under different types of batch sampling: (i) Shuffling, and (ii) Poisson subsampling; the typical analysis of Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent (DP-SGD) follows by interpreting it as a post-processing of ABLQ. While shuffling-based DP-SGD is more commonly used in practical implementations, it has not been amenable to easy privacy analysis, either analytically or even numerically. On the other hand, Poisson subsampling-based DP-SGD is challenging to scalably implement, but has a well-understood privacy analysis, with multiple open-source numerically tight privacy accountants available. This has led to a common practice of using shuffling-based DP-SGD in practice, but using the privacy analysis for the corresponding Poisson subsampling version. Our result shows that there can be a substantial gap between the privacy analysis when using the two types of batch sampling, and thus advises caution in reporting privacy parameters for DP-SGD.
Crosslingual Capabilities and Knowledge Barriers in Multilingual Large Language ModelsLynn Chua, Badih Ghazi, Yangsibo Huang et al.
Large language models (LLMs) are typically multilingual due to pretraining on diverse multilingual corpora. But can these models relate corresponding concepts across languages, i.e., be crosslingual? This study evaluates state-of-the-art LLMs on inherently crosslingual tasks. We observe that while these models show promising surface-level crosslingual abilities on machine translation and embedding space analyses, they struggle with deeper crosslingual knowledge transfer, revealing a crosslingual knowledge barrier in both general (MMLU benchmark) and domain-specific (Harry Potter quiz and TOFU benchmark) contexts. Since simple inference-time mitigation methods offer only limited improvement, we propose fine-tuning of LLMs on mixed-language data, which effectively reduces these gaps, even when using out-of-domain datasets like WikiText. Our findings suggest the need for explicit optimization to unlock the full crosslingual potential of LLMs. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/google-research/crosslingual-knowledge-barriers.
19.3LGNov 6, 2024
Scalable DP-SGD: Shuffling vs. Poisson SubsamplingLynn Chua, Badih Ghazi, Pritish Kamath et al.
We provide new lower bounds on the privacy guarantee of the multi-epoch Adaptive Batch Linear Queries (ABLQ) mechanism with shuffled batch sampling, demonstrating substantial gaps when compared to Poisson subsampling; prior analysis was limited to a single epoch. Since the privacy analysis of Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent (DP-SGD) is obtained by analyzing the ABLQ mechanism, this brings into serious question the common practice of implementing shuffling-based DP-SGD, but reporting privacy parameters as if Poisson subsampling was used. To understand the impact of this gap on the utility of trained machine learning models, we introduce a practical approach to implement Poisson subsampling at scale using massively parallel computation, and efficiently train models with the same. We compare the utility of models trained with Poisson-subsampling-based DP-SGD, and the optimistic estimates of utility when using shuffling, via our new lower bounds on the privacy guarantee of ABLQ with shuffling.
15.7LGDec 21, 2024
Balls-and-Bins Sampling for DP-SGDLynn Chua, Badih Ghazi, Charlie Harrison et al.
We introduce the Balls-and-Bins sampling for differentially private (DP) optimization methods such as DP-SGD. While it has been common practice to use some form of shuffling in DP-SGD implementations, privacy accounting algorithms have typically assumed that Poisson subsampling is used instead. Recent work by Chua et al. (ICML 2024), however, pointed out that shuffling based DP-SGD can have a much larger privacy cost in practical regimes of parameters. In this work we show that the Balls-and-Bins sampling achieves the "best-of-both" samplers, namely, the implementation of Balls-and-Bins sampling is similar to that of Shuffling and models trained using DP-SGD with Balls-and-Bins sampling achieve utility comparable to those trained using DP-SGD with Shuffling at the same noise multiplier, and yet, Balls-and-Bins sampling enjoys similar-or-better privacy amplification as compared to Poisson subsampling in practical regimes.
8.8LGDec 9, 2023
Optimal Unbiased Randomizers for Regression with Label Differential PrivacyAshwinkumar Badanidiyuru, Badih Ghazi, Pritish Kamath et al.
We propose a new family of label randomizers for training regression models under the constraint of label differential privacy (DP). In particular, we leverage the trade-offs between bias and variance to construct better label randomizers depending on a privately estimated prior distribution over the labels. We demonstrate that these randomizers achieve state-of-the-art privacy-utility trade-offs on several datasets, highlighting the importance of reducing bias when training neural networks with label DP. We also provide theoretical results shedding light on the structural properties of the optimal unbiased randomizers.
6.4LGApr 16, 2024
Differentially Private Optimization with Sparse GradientsBadih Ghazi, Cristóbal Guzmán, Pritish Kamath et al.
Motivated by applications of large embedding models, we study differentially private (DP) optimization problems under sparsity of individual gradients. We start with new near-optimal bounds for the classic mean estimation problem but with sparse data, improving upon existing algorithms particularly for the high-dimensional regime. Building on this, we obtain pure- and approximate-DP algorithms with almost optimal rates for stochastic convex optimization with sparse gradients; the former represents the first nearly dimension-independent rates for this problem. Finally, we study the approximation of stationary points for the empirical loss in approximate-DP optimization and obtain rates that depend on sparsity instead of dimension, modulo polylogarithmic factors.
10.2CVJun 5, 2025
Quantifying Cross-Modality Memorization in Vision-Language ModelsYuxin Wen, Yangsibo Huang, Tom Goldstein et al.
Understanding what and how neural networks memorize during training is crucial, both from the perspective of unintentional memorization of potentially sensitive information and from the standpoint of effective knowledge acquisition for real-world, knowledge-intensive tasks. While previous studies primarily investigate memorization within a single modality, such as text memorization in large language models or image memorization in diffusion models, unified multimodal models are becoming increasingly prevalent in practical applications. In this work, we focus on the unique characteristics of cross-modality memorization and conduct a systematic study centered on vision-language models. To facilitate controlled experiments, we first introduce a synthetic persona dataset comprising diverse synthetic person images and textual descriptions. We quantify factual knowledge memorization and cross-modal transferability by training models on a single modality and evaluating their performance in the other. Our results reveal that facts learned in one modality transfer to the other, but a significant gap exists between recalling information in the source and target modalities. Furthermore, we observe that this gap exists across various scenarios, including more capable models, machine unlearning, and the multi-hop case. At the end, we propose a baseline method to mitigate this challenge. We hope our study can inspire future research on developing more robust multimodal learning techniques to enhance cross-modal transferability.
2.3CROct 15, 2024
Differential Privacy on Trust GraphsBadih Ghazi, Ravi Kumar, Pasin Manurangsi et al.
We study differential privacy (DP) in a multi-party setting where each party only trusts a (known) subset of the other parties with its data. Specifically, given a trust graph where vertices correspond to parties and neighbors are mutually trusting, we give a DP algorithm for aggregation with a much better privacy-utility trade-off than in the well-studied local model of DP (where each party trusts no other party). We further study a robust variant where each party trusts all but an unknown subset of at most $t$ of its neighbors (where $t$ is a given parameter), and give an algorithm for this setting. We complement our algorithms with lower bounds, and discuss implications of our work to other tasks in private learning and analytics.
6.4LGJun 27, 2024
On Convex Optimization with Semi-Sensitive FeaturesBadih Ghazi, Pritish Kamath, Ravi Kumar et al.
We study the differentially private (DP) empirical risk minimization (ERM) problem under the semi-sensitive DP setting where only some features are sensitive. This generalizes the Label DP setting where only the label is sensitive. We give improved upper and lower bounds on the excess risk for DP-ERM. In particular, we show that the error only scales polylogarithmically in terms of the sensitive domain size, improving upon previous results that scale polynomially in the sensitive domain size (Ghazi et al., 2021).
10.4LGJan 26, 2024
Training Differentially Private Ad Prediction Models with Semi-Sensitive FeaturesLynn Chua, Qiliang Cui, Badih Ghazi et al.
Motivated by problems arising in digital advertising, we introduce the task of training differentially private (DP) machine learning models with semi-sensitive features. In this setting, a subset of the features is known to the attacker (and thus need not be protected) while the remaining features as well as the label are unknown to the attacker and should be protected by the DP guarantee. This task interpolates between training the model with full DP (where the label and all features should be protected) or with label DP (where all the features are considered known, and only the label should be protected). We present a new algorithm for training DP models with semi-sensitive features. Through an empirical evaluation on real ads datasets, we demonstrate that our algorithm surpasses in utility the baselines of (i) DP stochastic gradient descent (DP-SGD) run on all features (known and unknown), and (ii) a label DP algorithm run only on the known features (while discarding the unknown ones).
12.3LGMay 8, 2023
On User-Level Private Convex OptimizationBadih Ghazi, Pritish Kamath, Ravi Kumar et al.
We introduce a new mechanism for stochastic convex optimization (SCO) with user-level differential privacy guarantees. The convergence rates of this mechanism are similar to those in the prior work of Levy et al. (2021); Narayanan et al. (2022), but with two important improvements. Our mechanism does not require any smoothness assumptions on the loss. Furthermore, our bounds are also the first where the minimum number of users needed for user-level privacy has no dependence on the dimension and only a logarithmic dependence on the desired excess error. The main idea underlying the new mechanism is to show that the optimizers of strongly convex losses have low local deletion sensitivity, along with an output perturbation method for functions with low local deletion sensitivity, which could be of independent interest.
11.9LGNov 9, 2021
Logarithmic Regret from Sublinear HintsAditya Bhaskara, Ashok Cutkosky, Ravi Kumar et al.
We consider the online linear optimization problem, where at every step the algorithm plays a point $x_t$ in the unit ball, and suffers loss $\langle c_t, x_t\rangle$ for some cost vector $c_t$ that is then revealed to the algorithm. Recent work showed that if an algorithm receives a hint $h_t$ that has non-trivial correlation with $c_t$ before it plays $x_t$, then it can achieve a regret guarantee of $O(\log T)$, improving on the bound of $Θ(\sqrt{T})$ in the standard setting. In this work, we study the question of whether an algorithm really requires a hint at every time step. Somewhat surprisingly, we show that an algorithm can obtain $O(\log T)$ regret with just $O(\sqrt{T})$ hints under a natural query model; in contrast, we also show that $o(\sqrt{T})$ hints cannot guarantee better than $Ω(\sqrt{T})$ regret. We give two applications of our result, to the well-studied setting of optimistic regret bounds and to the problem of online learning with abstention.
11.3LGOct 21, 2021
User-Level Private Learning via Correlated SamplingBadih Ghazi, Ravi Kumar, Pasin Manurangsi
Most works in learning with differential privacy (DP) have focused on the setting where each user has a single sample. In this work, we consider the setting where each user holds $m$ samples and the privacy protection is enforced at the level of each user's data. We show that, in this setting, we may learn with a much fewer number of users. Specifically, we show that, as long as each user receives sufficiently many samples, we can learn any privately learnable class via an $(ε, δ)$-DP algorithm using only $O(\log(1/δ)/ε)$ users. For $ε$-DP algorithms, we show that we can learn using only $O_ε(d)$ users even in the local model, where $d$ is the probabilistic representation dimension. In both cases, we show a nearly-matching lower bound on the number of users required. A crucial component of our results is a generalization of global stability [Bun et al., FOCS 2020] that allows the use of public randomness. Under this relaxed notion, we employ a correlated sampling strategy to show that the global stability can be boosted to be arbitrarily close to one, at a polynomial expense in the number of samples.
21.7CRSep 27, 2021
Differentially Private Aggregation in the Shuffle Model: Almost Central Accuracy in Almost a Single MessageBadih Ghazi, Ravi Kumar, Pasin Manurangsi et al.
The shuffle model of differential privacy has attracted attention in the literature due to it being a middle ground between the well-studied central and local models. In this work, we study the problem of summing (aggregating) real numbers or integers, a basic primitive in numerous machine learning tasks, in the shuffle model. We give a protocol achieving error arbitrarily close to that of the (Discrete) Laplace mechanism in the central model, while each user only sends $1 + o(1)$ short messages in expectation.
25.4CRJun 8, 2021
Private Counting from Anonymous Messages: Near-Optimal Accuracy with Vanishing Communication OverheadBadih Ghazi, Ravi Kumar, Pasin Manurangsi et al.
Differential privacy (DP) is a formal notion for quantifying the privacy loss of algorithms. Algorithms in the central model of DP achieve high accuracy but make the strongest trust assumptions whereas those in the local DP model make the weakest trust assumptions but incur substantial accuracy loss. The shuffled DP model (Bittau et al., 2017; Erlingsson et al., 2019; Cheu et al., 2019) has recently emerged as a feasible middle ground between the central and local models, providing stronger trust assumptions than the former while promising higher accuracies than the latter. In this paper, we obtain practical communication-efficient algorithms in the shuffled DP model for two basic aggregation primitives used in machine learning: 1) binary summation, and 2) histograms over a moderate number of buckets. Our algorithms achieve accuracy that is arbitrarily close to that of central DP algorithms with an expected communication per user essentially matching what is needed without any privacy constraints! We demonstrate the practicality of our algorithms by experimentally comparing their performance to several widely-used protocols such as Randomized Response (Warner, 1965) and RAPPOR (Erlingsson et al., 2014).
30.5LGFeb 11, 2021
Deep Learning with Label Differential PrivacyBadih Ghazi, Noah Golowich, Ravi Kumar et al.
The Randomized Response (RR) algorithm is a classical technique to improve robustness in survey aggregation, and has been widely adopted in applications with differential privacy guarantees. We propose a novel algorithm, Randomized Response with Prior (RRWithPrior), which can provide more accurate results while maintaining the same level of privacy guaranteed by RR. We then apply RRWithPrior to learn neural networks with label differential privacy (LabelDP), and show that when only the label needs to be protected, the model performance can be significantly improved over the previous state-of-the-art private baselines. Moreover, we study different ways to obtain priors, which when used with RRWithPrior can additionally improve the model performance, further reducing the accuracy gap between private and non-private models. We complement the empirical results with theoretical analysis showing that LabelDP is provably easier than protecting both the inputs and labels.
6.6DSDec 16, 2020
On Avoiding the Union Bound When Answering Multiple Differentially Private QueriesBadih Ghazi, Ravi Kumar, Pasin Manurangsi
In this work, we study the problem of answering $k$ queries with $(ε, δ)$-differential privacy, where each query has sensitivity one. We give an algorithm for this task that achieves an expected $\ell_\infty$ error bound of $O(\frac{1}ε\sqrt{k \log \frac{1}δ})$, which is known to be tight (Steinke and Ullman, 2016). A very recent work by Dagan and Kur (2020) provides a similar result, albeit via a completely different approach. One difference between our work and theirs is that our guarantee holds even when $δ< 2^{-Ω(k/(\log k)^8)}$ whereas theirs does not apply in this case. On the other hand, the algorithm of Dagan and Kur has a remarkable advantage that the $\ell_{\infty}$ error bound of $O(\frac{1}ε\sqrt{k \log \frac{1}δ})$ holds not only in expectation but always (i.e., with probability one) while we can only get a high probability (or expected) guarantee on the error.
6.5LGNov 30, 2020
Robust and Private Learning of HalfspacesBadih Ghazi, Ravi Kumar, Pasin Manurangsi et al.
In this work, we study the trade-off between differential privacy and adversarial robustness under L2-perturbations in the context of learning halfspaces. We prove nearly tight bounds on the sample complexity of robust private learning of halfspaces for a large regime of parameters. A highlight of our results is that robust and private learning is harder than robust or private learning alone. We complement our theoretical analysis with experimental results on the MNIST and USPS datasets, for a learning algorithm that is both differentially private and adversarially robust.
10.1LGOct 6, 2020
Online Linear Optimization with Many HintsAditya Bhaskara, Ashok Cutkosky, Ravi Kumar et al.
We study an online linear optimization (OLO) problem in which the learner is provided access to $K$ "hint" vectors in each round prior to making a decision. In this setting, we devise an algorithm that obtains logarithmic regret whenever there exists a convex combination of the $K$ hints that has positive correlation with the cost vectors. This significantly extends prior work that considered only the case $K=1$. To accomplish this, we develop a way to combine many arbitrary OLO algorithms to obtain regret only a logarithmically worse factor than the minimum regret of the original algorithms in hindsight; this result is of independent interest.
23.8CRSep 21, 2020
On Distributed Differential Privacy and Counting Distinct ElementsLijie Chen, Badih Ghazi, Ravi Kumar et al.
We study the setup where each of $n$ users holds an element from a discrete set, and the goal is to count the number of distinct elements across all users, under the constraint of $(ε, δ)$-differentially privacy: - In the non-interactive local setting, we prove that the additive error of any protocol is $Ω(n)$ for any constant $ε$ and for any $δ$ inverse polynomial in $n$. - In the single-message shuffle setting, we prove a lower bound of $Ω(n)$ on the error for any constant $ε$ and for some $δ$ inverse quasi-polynomial in $n$. We do so by building on the moment-matching method from the literature on distribution estimation. - In the multi-message shuffle setting, we give a protocol with at most one message per user in expectation and with an error of $\tilde{O}(\sqrt(n))$ for any constant $ε$ and for any $δ$ inverse polynomial in $n$. Our protocol is also robustly shuffle private, and our error of $\sqrt(n)$ matches a known lower bound for such protocols. Our proof technique relies on a new notion, that we call dominated protocols, and which can also be used to obtain the first non-trivial lower bounds against multi-message shuffle protocols for the well-studied problems of selection and learning parity. Our first lower bound for estimating the number of distinct elements provides the first $ω(\sqrt(n))$ separation between global sensitivity and error in local differential privacy, thus answering an open question of Vadhan (2017). We also provide a simple construction that gives $\tildeΩ(n)$ separation between global sensitivity and error in two-party differential privacy, thereby answering an open question of McGregor et al. (2011).
18.6LGAug 18, 2020
Differentially Private Clustering: Tight Approximation RatiosBadih Ghazi, Ravi Kumar, Pasin Manurangsi
We study the task of differentially private clustering. For several basic clustering problems, including Euclidean DensestBall, 1-Cluster, k-means, and k-median, we give efficient differentially private algorithms that achieve essentially the same approximation ratios as those that can be obtained by any non-private algorithm, while incurring only small additive errors. This improves upon existing efficient algorithms that only achieve some large constant approximation factors. Our results also imply an improved algorithm for the Sample and Aggregate privacy framework. Furthermore, we show that one of the tools used in our 1-Cluster algorithm can be employed to get a faster quantum algorithm for ClosestPair in a moderate number of dimensions.
4.2LGJul 7, 2020
Near-tight closure bounds for Littlestone and threshold dimensionsBadih Ghazi, Noah Golowich, Ravi Kumar et al.
We study closure properties for the Littlestone and threshold dimensions of binary hypothesis classes. Given classes $\mathcal{H}_1, \ldots, \mathcal{H}_k$ of Boolean functions with bounded Littlestone (respectively, threshold) dimension, we establish an upper bound on the Littlestone (respectively, threshold) dimension of the class defined by applying an arbitrary binary aggregation rule to $\mathcal{H}_1, \ldots, \mathcal{H}_k$. We also show that our upper bounds are nearly tight. Our upper bounds give an exponential (in $k$) improvement upon analogous bounds shown by Alon et al. (COLT 2020), thus answering a question posed by their work.
18.9LGFeb 11, 2020
Online Learning with Imperfect HintsAditya Bhaskara, Ashok Cutkosky, Ravi Kumar et al.
We consider a variant of the classical online linear optimization problem in which at every step, the online player receives a "hint" vector before choosing the action for that round. Rather surprisingly, it was shown that if the hint vector is guaranteed to have a positive correlation with the cost vector, then the online player can achieve a regret of $O(\log T)$, thus significantly improving over the $O(\sqrt{T})$ regret in the general setting. However, the result and analysis require the correlation property at \emph{all} time steps, thus raising the natural question: can we design online learning algorithms that are resilient to bad hints? In this paper we develop algorithms and nearly matching lower bounds for online learning with imperfect directional hints. Our algorithms are oblivious to the quality of the hints, and the regret bounds interpolate between the always-correlated hints case and the no-hints case. Our results also generalize, simplify, and improve upon previous results on optimistic regret bounds, which can be viewed as an additive version of hints.
10.8DSFeb 6, 2020
Fair Correlation ClusteringSara Ahmadian, Alessandro Epasto, Ravi Kumar et al.
In this paper, we study correlation clustering under fairness constraints. Fair variants of $k$-median and $k$-center clustering have been studied recently, and approximation algorithms using a notion called fairlet decomposition have been proposed. We obtain approximation algorithms for fair correlation clustering under several important types of fairness constraints. Our results hinge on obtaining a fairlet decomposition for correlation clustering by introducing a novel combinatorial optimization problem. We define a fairlet decomposition with cost similar to the $k$-median cost and this allows us to obtain approximation algorithms for a wide range of fairness constraints. We complement our theoretical results with an in-depth analysis of our algorithms on real graphs where we show that fair solutions to correlation clustering can be obtained with limited increase in cost compared to the state-of-the-art (unfair) algorithms.
27.8CRFeb 5, 2020
Pure Differentially Private Summation from Anonymous MessagesBadih Ghazi, Noah Golowich, Ravi Kumar et al.
The shuffled (aka anonymous) model has recently generated significant interest as a candidate distributed privacy framework with trust assumptions better than the central model but with achievable errors smaller than the local model. We study pure differentially private (DP) protocols in the shuffled model for summation, a basic and widely used primitive: - For binary summation where each of n users holds a bit as an input, we give a pure $ε$-DP protocol for estimating the number of ones held by the users up to an error of $O_ε(1)$, and each user sends $O_ε(\log n)$ messages each of 1 bit. This is the first pure protocol in the shuffled model with error $o(\sqrt{n})$ for constant $ε$. Using this protocol, we give a pure $ε$-DP protocol that performs summation of real numbers in $[0, 1]$ up to an error of $O_ε(1)$, and where each user sends $O_ε(\log^3 n)$ messages each of $O(\log\log n)$ bits. - In contrast, we show that for any pure $ε$-DP protocol for binary summation in the shuffled model having absolute error $n^{0.5-Ω(1)}$, the per user communication has to be at least $Ω_ε(\sqrt{\log n})$ bits. This implies the first separation between the (bounded-communication) multi-message shuffled model and the central model, and the first separation between pure and approximate DP protocols in the shuffled model. To prove our lower bound, we consider (a generalization of) the following question: given $γ$ in $(0, 1)$, what is the smallest m for which there are two random variables $X^0, X^1$ supported on $\{0, \dots ,m\}$ such that (i) the total variation distance between $X^0$ and $X^1$ is at least $1-γ$, and (ii) the moment generating functions of $X^0$ and $X^1$ are within a constant factor of each other everywhere? We show that the answer is $m = Θ(\sqrt{\log(1/γ)})$.
31.4CRAug 29, 2019
On the Power of Multiple Anonymous MessagesBadih Ghazi, Noah Golowich, Ravi Kumar et al.
An exciting new development in differential privacy is the shuffled model, in which an anonymous channel enables non-interactive, differentially private protocols with error much smaller than what is possible in the local model, while relying on weaker trust assumptions than in the central model. In this paper, we study basic counting problems in the shuffled model and establish separations between the error that can be achieved in the single-message shuffled model and in the shuffled model with multiple messages per user. For the problem of frequency estimation for $n$ users and a domain of size $B$, we obtain: - A nearly tight lower bound of $\tildeΩ( \min(\sqrt[4]{n}, \sqrt{B}))$ on the error in the single-message shuffled model. This implies that the protocols obtained from the amplification via shuffling work of Erlingsson et al. (SODA 2019) and Balle et al. (Crypto 2019) are essentially optimal for single-message protocols. A key ingredient in the proof is a lower bound on the error of locally-private frequency estimation in the low-privacy (aka high $ε$) regime. - Protocols in the multi-message shuffled model with $poly(\log{B}, \log{n})$ bits of communication per user and $poly\log{B}$ error, which provide an exponential improvement on the error compared to what is possible with single-message algorithms. For the related selection problem on a domain of size $B$, we prove: - A nearly tight lower bound of $Ω(B)$ on the number of users in the single-message shuffled model. This significantly improves on the $Ω(B^{1/17})$ lower bound obtained by Cheu et al. (Eurocrypt 2019), and when combined with their $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{B})$-error multi-message protocol, implies the first separation between single-message and multi-message protocols for this problem.
2.3STJul 6, 2019
Testing Mixtures of Discrete DistributionsMaryam Aliakbarpour, Ravi Kumar, Ronitt Rubinfeld
There has been significant study on the sample complexity of testing properties of distributions over large domains. For many properties, it is known that the sample complexity can be substantially smaller than the domain size. For example, over a domain of size $n$, distinguishing the uniform distribution from distributions that are far from uniform in $\ell_1$-distance uses only $O(\sqrt{n})$ samples. However, the picture is very different in the presence of arbitrary noise, even when the amount of noise is quite small. In this case, one must distinguish if samples are coming from a distribution that is $ε$-close to uniform from the case where the distribution is $(1-ε)$-far from uniform. The latter task requires nearly linear in $n$ samples [Valiant 2008, Valian and Valiant 2011]. In this work, we present a noise model that on one hand is more tractable for the testing problem, and on the other hand represents a rich class of noise families. In our model, the noisy distribution is a mixture of the original distribution and noise, where the latter is known to the tester either explicitly or via sample access; the form of the noise is also known a priori. Focusing on the identity and closeness testing problems leads to the following mixture testing question: Given samples of distributions $p, q_1,q_2$, can we test if $p$ is a mixture of $q_1$ and $q_2$? We consider this general question in various scenarios that differ in terms of how the tester can access the distributions, and show that indeed this problem is more tractable. Our results show that the sample complexity of our testers are exactly the same as for the classical non-mixture case.
24.5DSMay 29, 2019
Clustering without Over-RepresentationSara Ahmadian, Alessandro Epasto, Ravi Kumar et al.
In this paper we consider clustering problems in which each point is endowed with a color. The goal is to cluster the points to minimize the classical clustering cost but with the additional constraint that no color is over-represented in any cluster. This problem is motivated by practical clustering settings, e.g., in clustering news articles where the color of an article is its source, it is preferable that no single news source dominates any cluster. For the most general version of this problem, we obtain an algorithm that has provable guarantees of performance; our algorithm is based on finding a fractional solution using a linear program and rounding the solution subsequently. For the special case of the problem where no color has an absolute majority in any cluster, we obtain a simpler combinatorial algorithm also with provable guarantees. Experiments on real-world data shows that our algorithms are effective in finding good clustering without over-representation.
1.4LGApr 5, 2017
Linear Additive Markov ProcessesRavi Kumar, Maithra Raghu, Tamas Sarlos et al.
We introduce LAMP: the Linear Additive Markov Process. Transitions in LAMP may be influenced by states visited in the distant history of the process, but unlike higher-order Markov processes, LAMP retains an efficient parametrization. LAMP also allows the specific dependence on history to be learned efficiently from data. We characterize some theoretical properties of LAMP, including its steady-state and mixing time. We then give an algorithm based on alternating minimization to learn LAMP models from data. Finally, we perform a series of real-world experiments to show that LAMP is more powerful than first-order Markov processes, and even holds its own against deep sequential models (LSTMs) with a negligible increase in parameter complexity.