Paper detail

Two-Party Privacy Games: How Users Perturb When Learners Preempt

Internet tracking technologies and wearable electronics provide a vast amount of data to machine learning algorithms. This stock of data stands to increase with the developments of the internet of things and cyber-physical systems. Clearly, these technologies promise benefits. But they also raise the risk of sensitive information disclosure. To mitigate this risk, machine learning algorithms can add noise to outputs according to the formulations provided by differential privacy. At the same time, users can fight for privacy by injecting noise into the data that they report. In this paper, we conceptualize the interactions between privacy and accuracy and between user (input) perturbation and learner (output) perturbation in machine learning, using the frameworks of empirical risk minimization, differential privacy, and Stackelberg games. In particular, we solve for the Stackelberg equilibrium for the case of an averaging query. We find that, in equilibrium, either the users perturb their data before submission or the learner perturbs the machine learning output, but never both. Specifically, the learner perturbs if and only if the number of users is greater than a threshold which increases with the degree to which incentives are misaligned. Provoked by these conclusions - and by some observations from privacy ethics - we also suggest future directions. While other work in this area has studied privacy markets and mechanism design for truthful reporting of user information, we take a different viewpoint by considering both user and learner perturbation. We hope that this effort will open the door to future work in the area of differential privacy games.

preprint2016arXivOpen 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.