Subset-Based Instance Optimality in Private Estimation

Overview

• The paper proposes a new definition of "instance optimality" for differentially private estimation algorithms.
• The proposed definition requires an optimal algorithm to compete with the best private benchmark algorithm that knows the dataset in advance and is evaluated based on its worst-case performance on large subsets of the data.
• The authors show that for real-valued datasets, they can construct private algorithms that achieve this notion of instance optimality when estimating a broad class of dataset properties, including means, quantiles, and ℓ_p-norm minimizers.
• For means in particular, the authors provide a detailed analysis and show that their algorithm matches or exceeds the asymptotic performance of existing algorithms under a range of distributional assumptions.

Plain English Explanation

The paper is about improving the way we evaluate the performance of algorithms that can privately estimate properties of a dataset, such as the average or median value. The authors argue that the way performance has been measured in the past is not strong enough, as it allows algorithms to perform poorly on certain datasets while still being considered "optimal."

To address this, the authors propose a new definition of "instance optimality." This requires an optimal algorithm to compete with the best private algorithm that already knows the full dataset in advance. This benchmark algorithm doesn't have to perform well if extreme data points are added, but it does have to handle the removal of a small number of real data points. This makes the benchmark much harder to beat than in previous work.

Remarkably, the authors show that for real-valued datasets, they can actually construct private algorithms that achieve this strong notion of instance optimality. These algorithms can accurately estimate properties like means, medians, and norms of the dataset, even when the data is subject to strict privacy constraints.

For estimating means in particular, the authors provide a detailed analysis. They show that their algorithm can match or even exceed the performance of existing algorithms, under a wide range of assumptions about the underlying data distribution.

Technical Explanation

The key innovation in this paper is the authors' definition of "instance optimality" for differentially private estimation algorithms. This definition requires an optimal algorithm to compete, for every possible dataset, with the best private benchmark algorithm that knows the full dataset in advance.

Importantly, this benchmark algorithm is evaluated based on its worst-case performance on large subsets of the data. It doesn't have to perform well if extreme data points are added, but it does have to handle the removal of a small number of real data points. This makes the benchmark significantly stronger than those used in prior work.

Despite this stronger benchmark, the authors show that for real-valued datasets, they can construct private algorithms that achieve this notion of instance optimality. These algorithms can accurately estimate a broad class of dataset properties, including means, quantiles, and ℓ,_,p,,-norm minimizers.

For means in particular, the authors provide a detailed analysis. They show that their algorithm can simultaneously match or exceed the asymptotic performance of existing algorithms under a range of distributional assumptions, including heavy-tailed distributions and settings with distributional shifts.

Critical Analysis

The authors acknowledge that their proposed notion of instance optimality is quite strong, as it requires the private algorithm to compete with a benchmark that knows the full dataset in advance. This makes the benchmark difficult to beat, and the authors note that their algorithms may not achieve instance optimality for all possible dataset properties or under all assumptions.

Additionally, the authors' analysis focuses primarily on real-valued datasets, and it's unclear how their results would extend to more complex data types or higher-dimensional settings. Further research would be needed to understand the limitations of this approach and explore its applicability in a broader range of scenarios.

That said, the authors' work represents a significant advance in the field of differentially private estimation. By proposing a stronger definition of optimality and demonstrating practical algorithms that can achieve it, they have raised the bar for what we should expect from private estimation techniques. This could inspire further research into even more robust and powerful private algorithms in the future.

Conclusion

This paper introduces a new, more demanding definition of "instance optimality" for differentially private estimation algorithms. The authors show that despite this stronger benchmark, they can construct private algorithms that achieve this notion of optimality for a broad class of dataset properties, including means, quantiles, and norms.

The authors' work represents an important step forward in the field of differentially private estimation, as it pushes the boundaries of what is possible in terms of accurate and robust private data analysis. While there are still some limitations and open questions, this research lays the groundwork for the development of even more powerful private estimation techniques in the future.