Background

Let (X,d)(\mathcal{X}, d) be a metric space, and ff be a function X→Rn\mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^n. A Gaussian mechanism adds Gaussian noise to the output of ff, such that for all neighboring pairs x,y∈Xx, y \in \mathcal{X} with d(x,y)=1d(x, y) = 1, it is hard to distinguish the outputs, i.e., their outputs distributions are similar.

Definition. The sensitivity Δ\Delta of ff is defined as

Δ=max⁡x,y∈X,d(x,y)=1∥f(x)−f(y)∥2, \Delta = \max_{x, y \in \mathcal{X}, d(x, y) = 1 } \Vert f(x) - f(y) \Vert_2,

where ∥⋅∥2\Vert \cdot \Vert_2 is the ℓ2\ell_2-norm of a vector in Rn\mathbb{R}^n.

Definition. Given ff and a variance parameter σ2\sigma^2, the output of the Gaussian mechanism is a random variable defines as

g(x)=f(x)+X, g(x) = f(x) + X,

where X=(X1,X2,...,Xn)∼N(0,σ2I)X = (X_1, X_2, ..., X_n) \sim N(0, \sigma^2 I).

Privacy Guarantee

Theorem. For δ,ϵ∈(0,1)\delta, \epsilon \in (0, 1), if σ2=Δ2ϵ2(2ln⁡1δ+ϵ)\sigma^2 = \frac{ \Delta^2 }{ \epsilon^2 } \Big( 2 \ln \frac{1}{\delta} + \epsilon \Big), then ∀x,y∈X\forall x, y \in \mathcal{X}, s.t., d(x,y)=1d(x, y) = 1, and for all measurable subset S⊂RnS \subset \mathbb{R}^n, it holds

Pr⁡[g(x)∈S]≤eϵ⋅Pr⁡[g(y)∈S]+δ \Pr[ g(x) \in S] \le e^\epsilon \cdot \Pr[ g(y) \in S] + \delta

It is obvious that if we set σ→∞\sigma \rightarrow \infty, then the Gaussian distribution converge to a uniform one and it holds that Pr⁡[g(x)∈S]=Pr⁡[g(y)∈S]\Pr[ g(x) \in S] = \Pr[ g(y) \in S]. Therefore, we are interested in how small σ\sigma can be.

We claim that σ=O(Δϵ)\sigma = O(\frac{\Delta}{\epsilon } ) suffices. This is based on three observations:

  1. Most of the probability mass of a Gaussian distribution concentrates on a ball centered at its mean with radius O(σ)O(\sigma).
  2. The density ratio of any two points within the ball is bounded by a constant.
  3. The distance between the distribution center of g(x)g(x) and g(y)g(y) is bounded by Δ\Delta.

Proof. To ease the notations, we write g(y)=f(y)+Yg(y) = f(y) + Y to distinguish it from g(x)g(x). By definition,

g(x)∼N(f(x),σ2I),g(y)∼N(f(y),σ2I).g(x) \sim N(f(x), \sigma^2 I), \quad g(y) \sim N( f(y), \sigma^2 I).

Let pxp_x and pyp_y the density functions of g(x)g(x) and g(y)g(y) respectively. The sketch of the proof is as follows: we partition Rn\mathbb{R}^n into two parts:

Y1={t∈Rn:px(t)≤eϵ⋅py(t)}Y2={t∈Rn:px(t)>eϵ⋅py(t)}. \mathcal{Y}_1 = \{ t \in \mathcal{R}^n : p_x(t) \le e^\epsilon \cdot p_y(t) \} \\ \mathcal{Y}_2 = \{ t \in \mathcal{R}^n : p_x(t) > e^\epsilon \cdot p_y(t) \}.

If Pr⁡[g(x)∈Y2]≤δ\Pr[ g(x) \in \mathcal{Y}_2 ] \le \delta (\big( here we measure the size of Y2\mathcal{Y}_2 by the probability measure induced by g(x)g(x) )\big), then

Pr⁡[g(x)∈S]=Pr⁡[g(x)∈S∩Y1]+Pr⁡[g(x)∈S∩Y2]≤Pr⁡[g(x)∈S∩Y1]+Pr⁡[g(x)∈Y2]≤Pr⁡[g(x)∈S∩Y1]+δ=∫S∩Y1px(t) dt+δ≤∫S∩Y1eϵ⋅py(t) dt+δ=eϵ⋅Pr⁡[g(y)∈S∩Y1]+δ.≤eϵ⋅Pr⁡[g(y)∈S]+δ. \begin{aligned} \Pr[ g(x) \in S] &= \Pr[ g(x) \in S \cap \mathcal{Y}_1] + \Pr[ g(x) \in S \cap \mathcal{Y}_2] \\ &\le \Pr[ g(x) \in S \cap \mathcal{Y}_1] + \Pr[ g(x) \in \mathcal{Y}_2] \\ &\le \Pr[ g(x) \in S \cap \mathcal{Y}_1] + \delta \\ &= \int_{S \cap \mathcal{Y}_1 } p_x(t) \ d t + \delta \\ &\le \int_{S \cap \mathcal{Y}_1 } e^\epsilon \cdot p_y(t) \ d t + \delta \\ &= e^\epsilon \cdot \Pr[ g(y) \in S \cap \mathcal{Y}_1] + \delta. \\ &\le e^\epsilon \cdot \Pr[ g(y) \in S ] + \delta. \\ \end{aligned}

As py(t)>0p_y(t) > 0 for all t∈Rnt \in \mathbb{R}^n, we can rewrite

Y1={t∈Rn:ln⁡px(t)py(t)≤ϵ}Y2={t∈Rn:ln⁡px(t)py(t)>ϵ}. \mathcal{Y}_1 = \Big\{ t \in \mathcal{R}^n : \ln \frac{p_x(t) }{ p_y(t) } \le \epsilon \Big\} \\ \mathcal{Y}_2 = \Big\{ t \in \mathcal{R}^n : \ln \frac{p_x(t) }{ p_y(t) } > \epsilon \Big\}.

In literature, the ratio ln⁡px(t)py(t)\ln \frac{p_x(t) }{ p_y(t) } is know as privacy loss. Substituting px(t)p_x(t) and py(t)p_y(t) with their definitions, and letting t′=t−f(x)t' = t - f(x) and v=f(x)−f(y)v = f(x) - f(y), we get

ln⁡px(t)py(t)=ln⁡12πσ2exp⁡(−∥t−f(x)∥22σ2)12πσ2exp⁡(−∥t−f(y)∥22σ2)=−∥t′∥2−∥t′+v∥22σ2=2vTt′+∥v∥22σ2. \begin{aligned} \ln \frac{ p_x( t) }{ p_y(t)} &= \ln \frac{ \frac{1}{ \sqrt{2 \pi \sigma^2} } \exp \Big( -\frac{ \Vert t - f(x)\Vert ^2 }{ 2 \sigma^2 } \Big) }{ \frac{1}{ \sqrt{2 \pi \sigma^2} } \exp \Big( -\frac{ \Vert t - f(y) \Vert ^2 }{ 2 \sigma^2 } \Big) } \\ &= -\frac{ \Vert t' \Vert ^2 - \Vert t' + v \Vert ^2 }{ 2 \sigma^2 } \\ &= \frac{ 2 v^T t' + \Vert v \Vert ^2 }{ 2 \sigma^2 } . \end{aligned}

If t∼N(f(x),σ2I)t \sim N( f(x), \sigma^2 I), it holds that t′∼N(0,σ2I)t' \sim N( 0, \sigma^2 I).

Then vTt′∼N(0,∥v∥2σ2)v^T t' \sim N(0, \Vert v \Vert ^2 \sigma^2). Let Z∼N(0,1)Z \sim N(0, 1), then ln⁡px(t)py(t)\ln \frac{ p_x( t) }{ p_y(t)} has the same distribution as

2∥v∥σZ+∥v∥22σ2=∥v∥22σ2+∥v∥σZ∼N(∥v∥22σ2,∥v∥2σ2). \frac{ 2 \Vert v\Vert \sigma Z + \Vert v\Vert ^2 }{ 2 \sigma^2 } = \frac{ \Vert v\Vert ^2 }{ 2 \sigma^2 } + \frac{ \Vert v\Vert }{ \sigma } Z \sim N \Big( \frac{ \Vert v\Vert ^2 }{ 2 \sigma^2 }, \frac{ \Vert v\Vert ^2 }{ \sigma^2 } \Big). \\

Now,

∥v∥22σ2+∥v∥σZ≥ϵ⟷Z≥σ∥v∥ϵ−∥v∥2σ \frac{ \Vert v\Vert ^2 }{ 2 \sigma^2 } + \frac{ \Vert v\Vert }{ \sigma } Z \ge \epsilon \\ \longleftrightarrow Z \ge \frac{ \sigma }{ \Vert v\Vert } \epsilon - \frac{ \Vert v\Vert }{ 2 \sigma }

As Z∼N(0,1)Z \sim N(0, 1), ∀z∈R≥0\forall z \in \mathbb{R}_{\ge 0},

Pr⁡[Z≥z]≤exp⁡(−z22). \Pr[ Z \ge z] \le \exp \Big( -\frac{ z^2 }{2} \Big).

Assuming that σ2≥∥v∥22ϵ\sigma^2 \ge \frac{\Vert v \Vert^2}{ 2 \epsilon }. Then σ∥v∥ϵ−∥v∥2σ≥0\frac{ \sigma }{ \Vert v\Vert } \epsilon - \frac{ \Vert v\Vert }{ 2 \sigma } \ge 0. Replacing zz with σ∥v∥ϵ−∥v∥2σ\frac{ \sigma }{ \Vert v\Vert } \epsilon - \frac{ \Vert v\Vert }{ 2 \sigma },

Pr⁡[z≥t]≤exp⁡(−12(σ∥v∥ϵ−∥v∥2σ)2). \Pr[ z \ge t ] \le \exp \Big( -\frac{1}{2} \Big( \frac{ \sigma }{ \Vert v\Vert } \epsilon - \frac{ \Vert v\Vert }{ 2 \sigma } \Big)^2 \Big).

We would like to bound this probability by some δ∈(0,1)\delta \in (0, 1), then

exp⁡(−12(σ∥v∥ϵ−∥v∥2σ)2)≤δ⟹σ∥v∥ϵ−∥v∥2σ≥2ln⁡1δ⟹ϵ∥v∥σ2−2ln⁡1δσ−∥v∥2≥0 \begin{aligned} &\exp \Big( -\frac{1}{2} \Big( \frac{ \sigma }{ \Vert v\Vert } \epsilon - \frac{ \Vert v\Vert }{ 2 \sigma } \Big)^2 \Big) \le \delta \\ &\Longrightarrow \frac{ \sigma }{ \Vert v\Vert } \epsilon - \frac{ \Vert v\Vert }{ 2 \sigma } \ge \sqrt{2 \ln \frac{1}{\delta} } \\ &\Longrightarrow \frac{\epsilon }{\Vert v\Vert } \sigma^2 - \sqrt{2 \ln \frac{1}{\delta} } \sigma - \frac{ \Vert v\Vert }{2} \ge 0 \end{aligned}

Finally, we get

σ≥2ln⁡1δ+2ln⁡1δ+2ϵ2ϵ∥v∥ \sigma \ge \frac{ \sqrt{ 2 \ln \frac{1}{\delta} } + \sqrt{ 2 \ln \frac{1}{\delta} + 2 \epsilon } }{ 2 \frac{\epsilon }{\Vert v\Vert } }

By concavity of the square root function, it suffices to take

σ=∥v∥ϵ0.5⋅2ln⁡1δ+0.5⋅(2ln⁡1δ+2ϵ)=∥v∥ϵ2ln⁡1δ+ϵ, \sigma = \frac{ \Vert v\Vert }{ \epsilon } \sqrt{ 0.5 \cdot 2 \ln \frac{1}{\delta} + 0.5 \cdot \Big( 2 \ln \frac{1}{\delta} + 2 \epsilon \Big) } = \frac{ \Vert v\Vert }{ \epsilon } \sqrt{ 2 \ln \frac{1}{\delta} + \epsilon },

i.e.,

σ2=∥v∥2ϵ2(2ln⁡1δ+ϵ). \sigma^2 = \frac{ \Vert v\Vert ^2 }{ \epsilon^2 } \Big( 2 \ln \frac{1}{\delta} + \epsilon \Big).

■\blacksquare

Reference

[1] G. Kamath, “Lecture 5 — Approximate Differential Privacy”, CS 860 - Algorithms for Private Data Analy sis.