Paper detail

Shuffle Private Linear Contextual Bandits

Differential privacy (DP) has been recently introduced to linear contextual bandits to formally address the privacy concerns in its associated personalized services to participating users (e.g., recommendations). Prior work largely focus on two trust models of DP: the central model, where a central server is responsible for protecting users sensitive data, and the (stronger) local model, where information needs to be protected directly on user side. However, there remains a fundamental gap in the utility achieved by learning algorithms under these two privacy models, e.g., $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{T})$ regret in the central model as compared to $\tilde{O}(T^{3/4})$ regret in the local model, if all users are unique within a learning horizon $T$. In this work, we aim to achieve a stronger model of trust than the central model, while suffering a smaller regret than the local model by considering recently popular shuffle model of privacy. We propose a general algorithmic framework for linear contextual bandits under the shuffle trust model, where there exists a trusted shuffler in between users and the central server, that randomly permutes a batch of users data before sending those to the server. We then instantiate this framework with two specific shuffle protocols: one relying on privacy amplification of local mechanisms, and another incorporating a protocol for summing vectors and matrices of bounded norms. We prove that both these instantiations lead to regret guarantees that significantly improve on that of the local model, and can potentially be of the order $\tilde{O}(T^{3/5})$ if all users are unique. We also verify this regret behavior with simulations on synthetic data. Finally, under the practical scenario of non-unique users, we show that the regret of our shuffle private algorithm scale as $\tilde{O}(T^{2/3})$, which matches that the central model could achieve in this case.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.