Synthetic Data, Similarity-based Privacy Metrics, and Regulatory (Non-)Compliance
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Explores the use of synthetic data to address privacy concerns in machine learning
- Proposes new similarity-based privacy metrics to evaluate the privacy-utility tradeoff of synthetic data
- Examines regulatory compliance challenges around the use of synthetic data
Plain English Explanation
The paper discusses the use of synthetic data as a way to address privacy concerns in machine learning. Synthetic data is artificially generated data that aims to preserve the statistical properties of real data without containing any sensitive information.
The researchers propose new similarity-based privacy metrics to evaluate the privacy-utility tradeoff of synthetic data. These metrics measure how similar the synthetic data is to the original data, while also considering the potential for privacy breaches.
The paper also explores the regulatory compliance challenges around the use of synthetic data, highlighting the need for clear guidelines and frameworks to ensure responsible and trustworthy use of this technology.
Technical Explanation
The paper first outlines the motivation for using synthetic data to address privacy concerns in machine learning. It then provides definitions for key concepts, such as privacy, utility, and similarity-based privacy metrics.
The researchers propose two new similarity-based privacy metrics: Differential Privacy Score and Affine Invariant Similarity Score. These metrics aim to quantify the privacy-utility tradeoff by measuring the similarity between the synthetic data and the original data, while also considering the potential for privacy breaches.
The paper also discusses the regulatory compliance challenges around the use of synthetic data, highlighting the need for clear guidelines and frameworks to ensure responsible and trustworthy use of this technology.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a thorough exploration of the use of synthetic data to address privacy concerns in machine learning. The proposed similarity-based privacy metrics are a valuable contribution, as they offer a more nuanced way to evaluate the privacy-utility tradeoff compared to traditional approaches.
However, the paper acknowledges that the practical implementation of these metrics may be challenging, as it requires access to the original data for comparison. Additionally, the paper does not address the potential for bias or skewed representations in the synthetic data, which could be a significant limitation.
The discussion on regulatory compliance is also an important consideration, as the lack of clear guidelines and frameworks could hinder the widespread adoption of synthetic data in real-world applications.
Conclusion
This paper offers a comprehensive examination of the use of synthetic data to address privacy concerns in machine learning. The proposed similarity-based privacy metrics provide a more sophisticated approach to evaluating the privacy-utility tradeoff, while also highlighting the regulatory compliance challenges that need to be addressed.
The insights and recommendations presented in this paper could inform the development of more effective and responsible synthetic data solutions, ultimately contributing to the ethical and trustworthy use of machine learning technologies.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
Synthetic Data, Similarity-based Privacy Metrics, and Regulatory (Non-)Compliance
Georgi Ganev
In this paper, we argue that similarity-based privacy metrics cannot ensure regulatory compliance of synthetic data. Our analysis and counter-examples show that they do not protect against singling out and linkability and, among other fundamental issues, completely ignore the motivated intruder test.
Read more7/29/2024
0
Synthetic Data: Revisiting the Privacy-Utility Trade-off
Fatima Jahan Sarmin, Atiquer Rahman Sarkar, Yang Wang, Noman Mohammed
Synthetic data has been considered a better privacy-preserving alternative to traditionally sanitized data across various applications. However, a recent article challenges this notion, stating that synthetic data does not provide a better trade-off between privacy and utility than traditional anonymization techniques, and that it leads to unpredictable utility loss and highly unpredictable privacy gain. The article also claims to have identified a breach in the differential privacy guarantees provided by PATEGAN and PrivBayes. When a study claims to refute or invalidate prior findings, it is crucial to verify and validate the study. In our work, we analyzed the implementation of the privacy game described in the article and found that it operated in a highly specialized and constrained environment, which limits the applicability of its findings to general cases. Our exploration also revealed that the game did not satisfy a crucial precondition concerning data distributions, which contributed to the perceived violation of the differential privacy guarantees offered by PATEGAN and PrivBayes. We also conducted a privacy-utility trade-off analysis in a more general and unconstrained environment. Our experimentation demonstrated that synthetic data achieves a more favorable privacy-utility trade-off compared to the provided implementation of k-anonymization, thereby reaffirming earlier conclusions.
Read more7/12/2024
0
Synthetic Data Outliers: Navigating Identity Disclosure
Carolina Trindade, Lu'is Antunes, T^ania Carvalho, Nuno Moniz
Multiple synthetic data generation models have emerged, among which deep learning models have become the vanguard due to their ability to capture the underlying characteristics of the original data. However, the resemblance of the synthetic to the original data raises important questions on the protection of individuals' privacy. As synthetic data is perceived as a means to fully protect personal information, most current related work disregards the impact of re-identification risk. In particular, limited attention has been given to exploring outliers, despite their privacy relevance. In this work, we analyze the privacy of synthetic data w.r.t the outliers. Our main findings suggest that outliers re-identification via linkage attack is feasible and easily achieved. Furthermore, additional safeguards such as differential privacy can prevent re-identification, albeit at the expense of the data utility.
Read more6/6/2024
📊
0
Auditing and Generating Synthetic Data with Controllable Trust Trade-offs
Brian Belgodere, Pierre Dognin, Adam Ivankay, Igor Melnyk, Youssef Mroueh, Aleksandra Mojsilovic, Jiri Navratil, Apoorva Nitsure, Inkit Padhi, Mattia Rigotti, Jerret Ross, Yair Schiff, Radhika Vedpathak, Richard A. Young
Real-world data often exhibits bias, imbalance, and privacy risks. Synthetic datasets have emerged to address these issues. This paradigm relies on generative AI models to generate unbiased, privacy-preserving data while maintaining fidelity to the original data. However, assessing the trustworthiness of synthetic datasets and models is a critical challenge. We introduce a holistic auditing framework that comprehensively evaluates synthetic datasets and AI models. It focuses on preventing bias and discrimination, ensures fidelity to the source data, assesses utility, robustness, and privacy preservation. We demonstrate the framework's effectiveness by auditing various generative models across diverse use cases like education, healthcare, banking, and human resources, spanning different data modalities such as tabular, time-series, vision, and natural language. This holistic assessment is essential for compliance with regulatory safeguards. We introduce a trustworthiness index to rank synthetic datasets based on their safeguards trade-offs. Furthermore, we present a trustworthiness-driven model selection and cross-validation process during training, exemplified with TrustFormers across various data types. This approach allows for controllable trustworthiness trade-offs in synthetic data creation. Our auditing framework fosters collaboration among stakeholders, including data scientists, governance experts, internal reviewers, external certifiers, and regulators. This transparent reporting should become a standard practice to prevent bias, discrimination, and privacy violations, ensuring compliance with policies and providing accountability, safety, and performance guarantees.
Read more6/11/2024