Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 253

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Universally Utility-maximizing Privacy Mechanisms

Ghosh, Arpita, Roughgarden, Tim, Sundararajan, Mukund·2012·SIAM Journal on Computing

Abstract

A mechanism for releasing information about a statistical database with sensitive data must resolve a trade-off between utility and privacy. Publishing fully accurate information maximizes utility while minimizing privacy, while publishing random noise accomplishes the opposite. Privacy can be rigorously quantified using the framework of differential privacy, which requires that a mechanism's output distribution is nearly the same whether a given database row is included. The goal of this paper is to formulate and provide strong and general utility guarantees, subject to differential privacy. We pursue mechanisms that guarantee near-optimal utility to every potential user, independent of its side information (modeled as a prior distribution over query results) and preferences (modeled via a symmetric and monotone loss function). Our main result is the following: for each fixed count query and differential privacy level, there is a geometric mechanism $M^*$---a discrete variant of the simple and well-studied mechanism that adds random noise from a Laplace distribution---that is simultaneously expected loss-minimizing for every possible user, subject to the differential privacy constraint. This is an extremely strong utility guarantee: every potential user $u$, no matter what its side information and preferences, derives as much utility from $M^*$ as from interacting with a differentially private mechanism $M_u$ that is optimally tailored to $u$. More precisely, for every user $u$ there is an optimal mechanism $M_u$ for it that factors into a user-independent part (the geometric mechanism $M^*$) and a user-specific postprocessing step that depends only on the output of the geometric mechanism and not on the underlying database. The first part of our proof of this result characterizes the optimal differentially private mechanism for a user as a certain basic feasible solution to a linear program with a user-specific objective function and user-independent constraints that encode differential privacy. The second part shows that all of the relevant vertices of the feasible region (ranging over all possible users) are derivable from the geometric mechanism via suitable remappings of its range.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1137/09076828x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 253

Metadata

Authors
Ghosh, A., Roughgarden, T., & Sundararajan, M.
Venue
SIAM Journal on Computing
Published
2012-01
Volume
41
Issue
6
Pages
1673-1693
ISSN
  • 0097-5397 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-7111
OpenAlex
W2090593019
Cited by
253
References
3
FWCI
8.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Universally Utility-maximizing Privacy Mechanisms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1137/09076828x
The paper
Ghosh, A., Roughgarden, T., & Sundararajan, M. (2012). Universally Utility-maximizing Privacy Mechanisms. SIAM Journal on Computing. https://doi.org/10.1137/09076828x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.