Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41191500›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025

The 2020 US Decennial Census is more private than you (might) think.

Buxin Su, Weijie J Su, Chendi Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

3 authors.

Buxin SuApplied Mathematics and Computational Science, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104.
Weijie J SuWharton Statistics and Data Science Department, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104.ORCID 0000-0003-1787-1219
Chendi WangDepartment of Statistics and Data Science, School of Economics, Xiamen University, Xiamen, Fujian 361000, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The US Decennial Census serves as the foundation for many high-profile policy decision-making processes, including federal funding allocation and redistricting. In 2020, the Census Bureau adopted differential privacy to protect the confidentiality of individual responses through a disclosure avoidance system that injects noise into census data tabulations. The Bureau subsequently posed an open question: Could stronger privacy guarantees be obtained for the 2020 US Census compared to their published guarantees, or equivalently, had the privacy budgets been fully utilized? In this paper, we address this question affirmatively by demonstrating that the 2020 US Census provides significantly stronger privacy protections than the officially published guarantees suggest at each of the eight geographical levels, from the national level down to the block level. This finding is enabled by our precise tracking of privacy losses using [Formula: see text]-differential privacy, applied to the composition of private queries across these geographical levels. Our analysis reveals that the Census Bureau introduced unnecessarily high levels of noise to meet the specified privacy guarantees for the 2020 Census. Consequently, we show that noise variances could be reduced by 15.08% to 24.82% while maintaining nearly the same level of privacy protection for each geographical level, thereby improving the accuracy of privatized census statistics. We empirically demonstrate that reducing noise injection into census statistics mitigates distortion caused by privacy constraints in downstream applications of private census data, illustrated through a study examining the relationship between earnings and education.

Indexed as

CensusesConfidentialityPrivacyHumansUnited Statesdata utilitydifferential privacyprivacy accountingUS Census

Identifiers

PMID41191500
PMCPMC12625972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.