Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40401165›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the ... ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management. ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management2024

Enhanced Privacy Bound for Shuffle Model with Personalized Privacy.

Yixuan Liu, Yuhan Liu, Li Xiong, Yujie Gu, Hong Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the ... ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management. ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Yixuan LiuRenmin University of China, Beijing, China.
Yuhan LiuRenmin University of China, Beijing, China.
Li XiongEmory University, Atlanta, USA.
Yujie GuKyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Hong ChenRenmin University of China, Beijing, China.

Funding

Decentralized differentially-private methods for dynamic data release and analysisR01LM013712 · NLM · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI JIANG, XIAOQIAN, OHNO-MACHADO, LUCILA · 2022 to 2025
$2.5M
Sensor Hardware and Intelligent Tools for Assessing the Health Effects of Heat ExposureR01ES033241 · NIEHS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI HERTZBERG, VICKI STOVER, XIONG, LI · 2022 to 2025
$2.5M
NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES033241NLM NIH HHS R01 LM013712
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The shuffle model of Differential Privacy (DP) is an enhanced privacy protocol which significantly amplifies the central DP guarantee by anonymizing and shuffling the local randomized data. Yet, deriving a tight privacy bound is challenging due to its complicated randomization protocol. While most existing works focused on uniform local privacy settings, this work focuses on a more practical personalized privacy setting. To bound the privacy after shuffling, we need to capture the probability of each user generating clones of the neighboring data points and quantify the indistinguishability between two distributions of the number of clones on neighboring datasets. Existing works either inaccurately capture the probability or underestimate the indistinguishability. We develop a more precise analysis, which yields a general and tighter bound for arbitrary DP mechanisms. Firstly, we derive the clone-generating probability by hypothesis testing, which leads to a more accurate characterization of the probability. Secondly, we analyze the indistinguishability in the context of

Indexed as

Differential PrivacyPersonalized PrivacyShuffle Model

Identifiers

PMID40401165
PMCPMC12094779

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.