Source author record

Cynthia Dwork

Cynthia Dwork appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

12works
7topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

12 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Improved Generalization Guarantees in Restricted Data Models

Differential privacy is known to protect against threats to validity incurred due to adaptive, or exploratory, data analysis -- even when the analyst adversarially searches for a statistical estimate that diverges from the true value of the quantity of interest on the underlying population. The cost of this protection is the accuracy loss incurred by differential privacy. In this work, inspired by standard models in the genomics literature, we consider data models in which individuals are represented by a sequence of attributes with the property that where distant attributes are only weakly correlated. We show that, under this assumption, it is possible to "re-use" privacy budget on different portions of the data, significantly improving accuracy without increasing the risk of overfitting.

preprint2020arXiv

Abstracting Fairness: Oracles, Metrics, and Interpretability

It is well understood that classification algorithms, for example, for deciding on loan applications, cannot be evaluated for fairness without taking context into account. We examine what can be learned from a fairness oracle equipped with an underlying understanding of ``true'' fairness. The oracle takes as input a (context, classifier) pair satisfying an arbitrary fairness definition, and accepts or rejects the pair according to whether the classifier satisfies the underlying fairness truth. Our principal conceptual result is an extraction procedure that learns the underlying truth; moreover, the procedure can learn an approximation to this truth given access to a weak form of the oracle. Since every ``truly fair'' classifier induces a coarse metric, in which those receiving the same decision are at distance zero from one another and those receiving different decisions are at distance one, this extraction process provides the basis for ensuring a rough form of metric fairness, also known as individual fairness. Our principal technical result is a higher fidelity extractor under a mild technical constraint on the weak oracle's conception of fairness. Our framework permits the scenario in which many classifiers, with differing outcomes, may all be considered fair. Our results have implications for interpretablity -- a highly desired but poorly defined property of classification systems that endeavors to permit a human arbiter to reject classifiers deemed to be ``unfair'' or illegitimately derived.

preprint2020arXiv

Individual Fairness in Pipelines

It is well understood that a system built from individually fair components may not itself be individually fair. In this work, we investigate individual fairness under pipeline composition. Pipelines differ from ordinary sequential or repeated composition in that individuals may drop out at any stage, and classification in subsequent stages may depend on the remaining "cohort" of individuals. As an example, a company might hire a team for a new project and at a later point promote the highest performer on the team. Unlike other repeated classification settings, where the degree of unfairness degrades gracefully over multiple fair steps, the degree of unfairness in pipelines can be arbitrary, even in a pipeline with just two stages. Guided by a panoply of real-world examples, we provide a rigorous framework for evaluating different types of fairness guarantees for pipelines. We show that naïve auditing is unable to uncover systematic unfairness and that, in order to ensure fairness, some form of dependence must exist between the design of algorithms at different stages in the pipeline. Finally, we provide constructions that permit flexibility at later stages, meaning that there is no need to lock in the entire pipeline at the time that the early stage is constructed.

preprint2020arXiv

Representation via Representations: Domain Generalization via Adversarially Learned Invariant Representations

We investigate the power of censoring techniques, first developed for learning {\em fair representations}, to address domain generalization. We examine {\em adversarial} censoring techniques for learning invariant representations from multiple "studies" (or domains), where each study is drawn according to a distribution on domains. The mapping is used at test time to classify instances from a new domain. In many contexts, such as medical forecasting, domain generalization from studies in populous areas (where data are plentiful), to geographically remote populations (for which no training data exist) provides fairness of a different flavor, not anticipated in previous work on algorithmic fairness. We study an adversarial loss function for $k$ domains and precisely characterize its limiting behavior as $k$ grows, formalizing and proving the intuition, backed by experiments, that observing data from a larger number of domains helps. The limiting results are accompanied by non-asymptotic learning-theoretic bounds. Furthermore, we obtain sufficient conditions for good worst-case prediction performance of our algorithm on previously unseen domains. Finally, we decompose our mappings into two components and provide a complete characterization of invariance in terms of this decomposition. To our knowledge, our results provide the first formal guarantees of these kinds for adversarial invariant domain generalization.

preprint2017arXiv

Privacy-Preserving Data Analysis for the Federal Statistical Agencies

Government statistical agencies collect enormously valuable data on the nation's population and business activities. Wide access to these data enables evidence-based policy making, supports new research that improves society, facilitates training for students in data science, and provides resources for the public to better understand and participate in their society. These data also affect the private sector. For example, the Employment Situation in the United States, published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, moves markets. Nonetheless, government agencies are under increasing pressure to limit access to data because of a growing understanding of the threats to data privacy and confidentiality. "De-identification" - stripping obvious identifiers like names, addresses, and identification numbers - has been found inadequate in the face of modern computational and informational resources. Unfortunately, the problem extends even to the release of aggregate data statistics. This counter-intuitive phenomenon has come to be known as the Fundamental Law of Information Recovery. It says that overly accurate estimates of too many statistics can completely destroy privacy. One may think of this as death by a thousand cuts. Every statistic computed from a data set leaks a small amount of information about each member of the data set - a tiny cut. This is true even if the exact value of the statistic is distorted a bit in order to preserve privacy. But while each statistical release is an almost harmless little cut in terms of privacy risk for any individual, the cumulative effect can be to completely compromise the privacy of some individuals.

preprint2016arXiv

Preserving Statistical Validity in Adaptive Data Analysis

A great deal of effort has been devoted to reducing the risk of spurious scientific discoveries, from the use of sophisticated validation techniques, to deep statistical methods for controlling the false discovery rate in multiple hypothesis testing. However, there is a fundamental disconnect between the theoretical results and the practice of data analysis: the theory of statistical inference assumes a fixed collection of hypotheses to be tested, or learning algorithms to be applied, selected non-adaptively before the data are gathered, whereas in practice data is shared and reused with hypotheses and new analyses being generated on the basis of data exploration and the outcomes of previous analyses. In this work we initiate a principled study of how to guarantee the validity of statistical inference in adaptive data analysis. As an instance of this problem, we propose and investigate the question of estimating the expectations of $m$ adaptively chosen functions on an unknown distribution given $n$ random samples. We show that, surprisingly, there is a way to estimate an exponential in $n$ number of expectations accurately even if the functions are chosen adaptively. This gives an exponential improvement over standard empirical estimators that are limited to a linear number of estimates. Our result follows from a general technique that counter-intuitively involves actively perturbing and coordinating the estimates, using techniques developed for privacy preservation. We give additional applications of this technique to our question.

preprint2015arXiv

Generalization in Adaptive Data Analysis and Holdout Reuse

Overfitting is the bane of data analysts, even when data are plentiful. Formal approaches to understanding this problem focus on statistical inference and generalization of individual analysis procedures. Yet the practice of data analysis is an inherently interactive and adaptive process: new analyses and hypotheses are proposed after seeing the results of previous ones, parameters are tuned on the basis of obtained results, and datasets are shared and reused. An investigation of this gap has recently been initiated by the authors in (Dwork et al., 2014), where we focused on the problem of estimating expectations of adaptively chosen functions. In this paper, we give a simple and practical method for reusing a holdout (or testing) set to validate the accuracy of hypotheses produced by a learning algorithm operating on a training set. Reusing a holdout set adaptively multiple times can easily lead to overfitting to the holdout set itself. We give an algorithm that enables the validation of a large number of adaptively chosen hypotheses, while provably avoiding overfitting. We illustrate the advantages of our algorithm over the standard use of the holdout set via a simple synthetic experiment. We also formalize and address the general problem of data reuse in adaptive data analysis. We show how the differential-privacy based approach given in (Dwork et al., 2014) is applicable much more broadly to adaptive data analysis. We then show that a simple approach based on description length can also be used to give guarantees of statistical validity in adaptive settings. Finally, we demonstrate that these incomparable approaches can be unified via the notion of approximate max-information that we introduce.

preprint2015arXiv

Private False Discovery Rate Control

We provide the first differentially private algorithms for controlling the false discovery rate (FDR) in multiple hypothesis testing, with essentially no loss in power under certain conditions. Our general approach is to adapt a well-known variant of the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure (BHq), making each step differentially private. This destroys the classical proof of FDR control. To prove FDR control of our method, (a) we develop a new proof of the original (non-private) BHq algorithm and its robust variants -- a proof requiring only the assumption that the true null test statistics are independent, allowing for arbitrary correlations between the true nulls and false nulls. This assumption is fairly weak compared to those previously shown in the vast literature on this topic, and explains in part the empirical robustness of BHq. Then (b) we relate the FDR control properties of the differentially private version to the control properties of the non-private version. \end{enumerate} We also present a low-distortion "one-shot" differentially private primitive for "top $k$" problems, e.g., "Which are the $k$ most popular hobbies?" (which we apply to: "Which hypotheses have the $k$ most significant $p$-values?"), and use it to get a faster privacy-preserving instantiation of our general approach at little cost in accuracy. The proof of privacy for the one-shot top~$k$ algorithm introduces a new technique of independent interest.

preprint2013arXiv

Efficient Algorithms for Privately Releasing Marginals via Convex Relaxations

Consider a database of $n$ people, each represented by a bit-string of length $d$ corresponding to the setting of $d$ binary attributes. A $k$-way marginal query is specified by a subset $S$ of $k$ attributes, and a $|S|$-dimensional binary vector $β$ specifying their values. The result for this query is a count of the number of people in the database whose attribute vector restricted to $S$ agrees with $β$. Privately releasing approximate answers to a set of $k$-way marginal queries is one of the most important and well-motivated problems in differential privacy. Information theoretically, the error complexity of marginal queries is well-understood: the per-query additive error is known to be at least $Ω(\min\{\sqrt{n},d^{\frac{k}{2}}\})$ and at most $\tilde{O}(\min\{\sqrt{n} d^{1/4},d^{\frac{k}{2}}\})$. However, no polynomial time algorithm with error complexity as low as the information theoretic upper bound is known for small $n$. In this work we present a polynomial time algorithm that, for any distribution on marginal queries, achieves average error at most $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{n} d^{\frac{\lceil k/2 \rceil}{4}})$. This error bound is as good as the best known information theoretic upper bounds for $k=2$. This bound is an improvement over previous work on efficiently releasing marginals when $k$ is small and when error $o(n)$ is desirable. Using private boosting we are also able to give nearly matching worst-case error bounds. Our algorithms are based on the geometric techniques of Nikolov, Talwar, and Zhang. The main new ingredients are convex relaxations and careful use of the Frank-Wolfe algorithm for constrained convex minimization. To design our relaxations, we rely on the Grothendieck inequality from functional analysis.

preprint2012arXiv

On Privacy-Preserving Histograms

We advance the approach initiated by Chawla et al. for sanitizing (census) data so as to preserve the privacy of respondents while simultaneously extracting "useful" statistical information. First, we extend the scope of their techniques to a broad and rich class of distributions, specifically, mixtures of highdimensional balls, spheres, Gaussians, and other "nice" distributions. Second, we randomize the histogram constructions to preserve spatial characteristics of the data, allowing us to approximate various quantities of interest, e.g., cost of the minimum spanning tree on the data, in a privacy-preserving fashion.

preprint2011arXiv

Fairness Through Awareness

We study fairness in classification, where individuals are classified, e.g., admitted to a university, and the goal is to prevent discrimination against individuals based on their membership in some group, while maintaining utility for the classifier (the university). The main conceptual contribution of this paper is a framework for fair classification comprising (1) a (hypothetical) task-specific metric for determining the degree to which individuals are similar with respect to the classification task at hand; (2) an algorithm for maximizing utility subject to the fairness constraint, that similar individuals are treated similarly. We also present an adaptation of our approach to achieve the complementary goal of "fair affirmative action," which guarantees statistical parity (i.e., the demographics of the set of individuals receiving any classification are the same as the demographics of the underlying population), while treating similar individuals as similarly as possible. Finally, we discuss the relationship of fairness to privacy: when fairness implies privacy, and how tools developed in the context of differential privacy may be applied to fairness.