Ask any question about EPFL courses, lectures, exercises, research, news, etc. or try the example questions below.
DISCLAIMER: The Graph Chatbot is not programmed to provide explicit or categorical answers to your questions. Rather, it transforms your questions into API requests that are distributed across the various IT services officially administered by EPFL. Its purpose is solely to collect and recommend relevant references to content that you can explore to help you answer your questions.
Differential privacy (DP) is a widely used approach for mitigating privacy risks when training machine learning models on sensitive data. DP mechanisms add noise during training to limit the risk of information leakage. The scale of the added noise is critical, as it determines the trade-off between privacy and utility. The standard practice is to select the noise scale to satisfy a given privacy budget epsilon. This privacy budget is in turn interpreted in terms of operational attack risks, such as accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of inference attacks aimed to recover information about the training data records. We show that first calibrating the noise scale to a privacy budget e, and then translating e to attack risk leads to overly conservative risk assessments and unnecessarily low utility. Instead, we propose methods to directly calibrate the noise scale to a desired attack risk level, bypassing the step of choosing e. For a given notion of attack risk, our approach significantly decreases noise scale, leading to increased utility at the same level of privacy. We empirically demonstrate that calibrating noise to attack sensitivity/specificity, rather than e, when training privacy-preserving ML models substantially improves model accuracy for the same risk level. Our work provides a principled and practical way to improve the utility of privacy-preserving ML without compromising on privacy.