ResearchTrend.AI
  • Papers
  • Communities
  • Events
  • Blog
  • Pricing
Papers
Communities
Social Events
Terms and Conditions
Pricing
Parameter LabParameter LabTwitterGitHubLinkedInBlueskyYoutube

© 2025 ResearchTrend.AI, All rights reserved.

  1. Home
  2. Papers
  3. 2201.05964
87
50

Visualizing Privacy-Utility Trade-Offs in Differentially Private Data Releases

16 January 2022
Priyanka Nanayakkara
Johes Bater
Xi He
Jessica Hullman
Jennie Duggan
ArXiv (abs)PDFHTML
Abstract

Organizations often collect private data and release aggregate statistics for the public's benefit. If no steps toward preserving privacy are taken, adversaries may use released statistics to deduce unauthorized information about the individuals described in the private dataset. Differentially private algorithms address this challenge by slightly perturbing underlying statistics with noise, thereby mathematically limiting the amount of information that may be deduced from each data release. Properly calibrating these algorithms -- and in turn the disclosure risk for people described in the dataset -- requires a data curator to choose a value for a privacy budget parameter, ϵ\epsilonϵ. However, there is little formal guidance for choosing ϵ\epsilonϵ, a task that requires reasoning about the probabilistic privacy-utility trade-off. Furthermore, choosing ϵ\epsilonϵ in the context of statistical inference requires reasoning about accuracy trade-offs in the presence of both measurement error and differential privacy (DP) noise. We present Visualizing Privacy (ViP), an interactive interface that visualizes relationships between ϵ\epsilonϵ, accuracy, and disclosure risk to support setting and splitting ϵ\epsilonϵ among queries. As a user adjusts ϵ\epsilonϵ, ViP dynamically updates visualizations depicting expected accuracy and risk. ViP also has an inference setting, allowing a user to reason about the impact of DP noise on statistical inferences. Finally, we present results of a study where 16 research practitioners with little to no DP background completed a set of tasks related to setting ϵ\epsilonϵ using both ViP and a control. We find that ViP helps participants more correctly answer questions related to judging the probability of where a DP-noised release is likely to fall and comparing between DP-noised and non-private confidence intervals.

View on arXiv
Comments on this paper