PreprintCited by 492Privacy-Preserving Technologies in DataAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningCryptography and Data Security

Semi-supervised Knowledge Transfer for Deep Learning from Private Training Data

Open access
Papernot, Nicolas, Abadi, Martín, Erlingsson, Úlfar, Goodfellow, Ian, Talwar, Kunal·2016·arXiv

Abstract

Some machine learning applications involve training data that is sensitive, such as the medical histories of patients in a clinical trial. A model may inadvertently and implicitly store some of its training data; careful analysis of the model may therefore reveal sensitive information. To address this problem, we demonstrate a generally applicable approach to providing strong privacy guarantees for training data: Private Aggregation of Teacher Ensembles (PATE). The approach combines, in a black-box fashion, multiple models trained with disjoint datasets, such as records from different subsets of users. Because they rely directly on sensitive data, these models are not published, but instead used as "teachers" for a "student" model. The student learns to predict an output chosen by noisy voting among all of the teachers, and cannot directly access an individual teacher or the underlying data or parameters. The student's privacy properties can be understood both intuitively (since no single teacher and thus no single dataset dictates the student's training) and formally, in terms of differential privacy. These properties hold even if an adversary can not only query the student but also inspect its internal workings. Compared with previous work, the approach imposes only weak assumptions on how teachers are trained: it applies to any model, including non-convex models like DNNs. We achieve state-of-the-art privacy/utility trade-offs on MNIST and SVHN thanks to an improved privacy analysis and semi-supervised learning.

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1610.05755

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Technologists use differential privacy to create a barrier between hackers and data to prevent data from being restored after a breach.

    “Technologists also use differential privacy to create a barrier between hackers and data to prevent data from being restored after a breach [92].”

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

Cited by 492

Research works printed but not linked: 38

  1. Martin Abadi, Andy Chu, Ian Goodfellow, H. Brendan McMahan, Ilya Mironov, Kunal Talwar, and Li Zhang. Deep learning with differential privacy. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security . ACM, 2016.
  2. Charu C Aggarwal. On k-anonymity and the curse of dimensionality. In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Very Large Data Bases , pp. 901-909. VLDB Endowment, 2005.
  3. Dana Angluin. Queries and concept learning. Machine learning , 2(4):319-342, 1988.
  4. Raef Bassily, Adam Smith, and Abhradeep Thakurta. Differentially private empirical risk minimization: efficient algorithms and tight error bounds. arXiv preprint arXiv:1405.7085 , 2014. · arXiv
  5. Eric B Baum. Neural net algorithms that learn in polynomial time from examples and queries. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks , 2(1):5-19, 1991.
  6. Leo Breiman. Bagging predictors. Machine Learning , 24(2):123-140, 1994.
  7. Jane Bromley, James W Bentz, L´ eon Bottou, Isabelle Guyon, Yann LeCun, Cliff Moore, Eduard S¨ ackinger, and Roopak Shah. Signature verification using a 'Siamese' time delay neural network. International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence , 7(04):669-688, 1993.
  8. Cristian Bucilua, Rich Caruana, and Alexandru Niculescu-Mizil. Model compression. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data mining , pp. 535-541. ACM, 2006.
  9. Mark Bun and Thomas Steinke. Concentrated differential privacy: simplifications, extensions, and lower bounds. In Proceedings of TCC , 2016.
  10. Kamalika Chaudhuri and Claire Monteleoni. Privacy-preserving logistic regression. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pp. 289-296, 2009.
  11. Kamalika Chaudhuri, Claire Monteleoni, and Anand D Sarwate. Differentially private empirical risk minimization. Journal of Machine Learning Research , 12(Mar):1069-1109, 2011.
  12. Thomas G Dietterich. Ensemble methods in machine learning. In International workshop on multiple classifier systems , pp. 1-15. Springer, 2000.
  13. Cynthia Dwork. A firm foundation for private data analysis. Communications of the ACM , 54(1): 86-95, 2011.
  14. Cynthia Dwork and Aaron Roth. The algorithmic foundations of differential privacy. Foundations and Trends in Theoretical Computer Science , 9(3-4):211-407, 2014.
  15. Cynthia Dwork and Guy N Rothblum. Concentrated differential privacy. arXiv preprint arXiv:1603.01887 , 2016. · arXiv
  16. Cynthia Dwork, Krishnaram Kenthapadi, Frank McSherry, Ilya Mironov, and Moni Naor. Our data, ourselves: privacy via distributed noise generation. In Advances in Cryptology-EUROCRYPT 2006 , pp. 486-503. Springer, 2006a.
  17. Cynthia Dwork, Frank McSherry, Kobbi Nissim, and Adam Smith. Calibrating noise to sensitivity in private data analysis. In Theory of Cryptography , pp. 265-284. Springer, 2006b.
  18. Cynthia Dwork, Guy N Rothblum, and Salil Vadhan. Boosting and differential privacy. In Proceedings of the 51st IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science , pp. 51-60. IEEE, 2010.
  19. ´ Ulfar Erlingsson, Vasyl Pihur, and Aleksandra Korolova. RAPPOR: Randomized aggregatable privacy-preserving ordinal response. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security , pp. 1054-1067. ACM, 2014.
  20. Matt Fredrikson, Somesh Jha, and Thomas Ristenpart. Model inversion attacks that exploit confidence information and basic countermeasures. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security , pp. 1322-1333. ACM, 2015.
  21. Ian Goodfellow, Jean Pouget-Abadie, Mehdi Mirza, Bing Xu, David Warde-Farley, Sherjil Ozair, Aaron Courville, and Yoshua Bengio. Generative adversarial nets. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pp. 2672-2680, 2014.
  22. Jihun Hamm, Paul Cao, and Mikhail Belkin. Learning privately from multiparty data. arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.03552 , 2016. · arXiv
  23. Geoffrey Hinton, Oriol Vinyals, and Jeff Dean. Distilling the knowledge in a neural network. arXiv preprint arXiv:1503.02531 , 2015. · arXiv
  24. Geetha Jagannathan, Claire Monteleoni, and Krishnan Pillaipakkamnatt. A semi-supervised learning approach to differential privacy. In 2013 IEEE 13th International Conference on Data Mining Workshops , pp. 841-848. IEEE, 2013.
  25. Anjuli Kannan, Karol Kurach, Sujith Ravi, Tobias Kaufmann, Andrew Tomkins, Balint Miklos, Greg Corrado, et al. Smart reply: Automated response suggestion for email. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data mining , volume 36, pp. 495-503, 2016.
  26. Gregory Koch. Siamese neural networks for one-shot image recognition . PhD thesis, University of Toronto, 2015.
  27. Igor Kononenko. Machine learning for medical diagnosis: history, state of the art and perspective. Artificial Intelligence in medicine , 23(1):89-109, 2001.
  28. L. Sweeney. k-anonymity: A model for protecting privacy. volume 10, pp. 557-570. World Scientific, 2002.
  29. Kobbi Nissim, Sofya Raskhodnikova, and Adam Smith. Smooth sensitivity and sampling in private data analysis. In Proceedings of the 39th annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing , pp. 75-84. ACM, 2007.
  30. Manas Pathak, Shantanu Rane, and Bhiksha Raj. Multiparty differential privacy via aggregation of locally trained classifiers. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pp. 1876-1884, 2010.
  31. Manas Pathak, Shantanu Rane, Wei Sun, and Bhiksha Raj. Privacy preserving probabilistic inference with hidden markov models. In 2011 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing , pp. 5868-5871. IEEE, 2011.
  32. Jason Poulos and Rafael Valle. Missing data imputation for supervised learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.09075 , 2016. · arXiv
  33. Tim Salimans, Ian Goodfellow, Wojciech Zaremba, Vicki Cheung, Alec Radford, and Xi Chen. Improved techniques for training GANs. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.03498 , 2016. · arXiv
  34. Reza Shokri and Vitaly Shmatikov. Privacy-preserving deep learning. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security . ACM, 2015.
  35. Shuang Song, Kamalika Chaudhuri, and Anand D Sarwate. Stochastic gradient descent with differentially private updates. In Global Conference on Signal and Information Processing , pp. 245-248. IEEE, 2013.
  36. Latanya Sweeney. Weaving technology and policy together to maintain confidentiality. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , 25(2-3):98-110, 1997.
  37. Martin J Wainwright, Michael I Jordan, and John C Duchi. Privacy aware learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pp. 1430-1438, 2012.
  38. Stanley L Warner. Randomized response: A survey technique for eliminating evasive answer bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 60(309):63-69, 1965.

Authors
Papernot, N., Abadi, M., Erlingsson, Ú., Goodfellow, I., & Talwar, K.
Affiliations
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • Google (United States) (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2016
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2532781556
Cited by
492
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 81 · 2022: 65 · 2021: 75 · 2020: 83 · 2019: 59 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 7 · 2012: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Cryptography and Data Security
Keywords
pâté, differential privacy, semi-supervised learning, training data privacy, knowledge transfer, deep neural network, privacy-utility trade-off

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