对w-事件差分隐私机制的效用进行基准测试——当基线成为强大的竞争者时

Christine Schäler, Thomas Hütter, Martin Schäler
{"title":"对w-事件差分隐私机制的效用进行基准测试——当基线成为强大的竞争者时","authors":"Christine Schäler, Thomas Hütter, Martin Schäler","doi":"10.14778/3594512.3594515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The\n w\n -event framework is the current standard for ensuring differential privacy on continuously monitored data streams. Following the proposition of\n w\n -event differential privacy, various mechanisms to implement the framework are proposed. Their comparability in empirical studies is vital for both practitioners to choose a suitable mechanism, and researchers to identify current limitations and propose novel mechanisms. By conducting a literature survey, we observe that the results of existing studies are hardly comparable and partially intrinsically inconsistent.\n \n \n To this end, we formalize an empirical study of\n w\n -event mechanisms by re-occurring elements found in our survey. We introduce requirements on these elements that ensure the comparability of experimental results. Moreover, we propose a benchmark that meets all requirements and establishes a new way to evaluate existing and newly proposed mechanisms. Conducting a large-scale empirical study, we gain valuable new insights into the strengths and weaknesses of existing mechanisms. An unexpected - yet explainable - result is a baseline supremacy, i.e., using one of the two baseline mechanisms is expected to deliver good or even the best utility. Finally, we provide guidelines for practitioners to select suitable mechanisms and improvement options for researchers.\n","PeriodicalId":20467,"journal":{"name":"Proc. VLDB Endow.","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benchmarking the Utility of w-event Differential Privacy Mechanisms - When Baselines Become Mighty Competitors\",\"authors\":\"Christine Schäler, Thomas Hütter, Martin Schäler\",\"doi\":\"10.14778/3594512.3594515\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The\\n w\\n -event framework is the current standard for ensuring differential privacy on continuously monitored data streams. Following the proposition of\\n w\\n -event differential privacy, various mechanisms to implement the framework are proposed. Their comparability in empirical studies is vital for both practitioners to choose a suitable mechanism, and researchers to identify current limitations and propose novel mechanisms. By conducting a literature survey, we observe that the results of existing studies are hardly comparable and partially intrinsically inconsistent.\\n \\n \\n To this end, we formalize an empirical study of\\n w\\n -event mechanisms by re-occurring elements found in our survey. We introduce requirements on these elements that ensure the comparability of experimental results. Moreover, we propose a benchmark that meets all requirements and establishes a new way to evaluate existing and newly proposed mechanisms. Conducting a large-scale empirical study, we gain valuable new insights into the strengths and weaknesses of existing mechanisms. An unexpected - yet explainable - result is a baseline supremacy, i.e., using one of the two baseline mechanisms is expected to deliver good or even the best utility. Finally, we provide guidelines for practitioners to select suitable mechanisms and improvement options for researchers.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":20467,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proc. VLDB Endow.\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proc. VLDB Endow.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14778/3594512.3594515\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proc. VLDB Endow.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14778/3594512.3594515","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

w -event框架是确保连续监控数据流上的差异隐私的当前标准。在w事件差分隐私的基础上,提出了实现该框架的各种机制。它们在实证研究中的可比性对于从业者选择合适的机制和研究人员识别当前的局限性并提出新的机制至关重要。通过进行文献调查,我们观察到现有研究的结果很难比较,部分本质上不一致。为此,我们通过重新出现我们调查中发现的元素,形式化了w事件机制的实证研究。我们介绍了对这些元素的要求,以确保实验结果的可比性。此外,我们提出了一个满足所有要求的基准,并建立了一种评估现有机制和新提议机制的新方法。通过大规模的实证研究,我们对现有机制的优缺点获得了宝贵的新见解。一个意想不到的(但可以解释的)结果是基线至上,也就是说,使用两种基线机制中的一种有望提供良好甚至最佳的效用。最后,我们为从业者提供了选择合适的机制和研究人员改进方案的指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Benchmarking the Utility of w-event Differential Privacy Mechanisms - When Baselines Become Mighty Competitors
The w -event framework is the current standard for ensuring differential privacy on continuously monitored data streams. Following the proposition of w -event differential privacy, various mechanisms to implement the framework are proposed. Their comparability in empirical studies is vital for both practitioners to choose a suitable mechanism, and researchers to identify current limitations and propose novel mechanisms. By conducting a literature survey, we observe that the results of existing studies are hardly comparable and partially intrinsically inconsistent. To this end, we formalize an empirical study of w -event mechanisms by re-occurring elements found in our survey. We introduce requirements on these elements that ensure the comparability of experimental results. Moreover, we propose a benchmark that meets all requirements and establishes a new way to evaluate existing and newly proposed mechanisms. Conducting a large-scale empirical study, we gain valuable new insights into the strengths and weaknesses of existing mechanisms. An unexpected - yet explainable - result is a baseline supremacy, i.e., using one of the two baseline mechanisms is expected to deliver good or even the best utility. Finally, we provide guidelines for practitioners to select suitable mechanisms and improvement options for researchers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cryptographically Secure Private Record Linkage Using Locality-Sensitive Hashing Utility-aware Payment Channel Network Rebalance Relational Query Synthesis ⋈ Decision Tree Learning Billion-Scale Bipartite Graph Embedding: A Global-Local Induced Approach Query Refinement for Diversity Constraint Satisfaction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1