Showing 1–2 of 2 results for author: Zagardo, D
-
Too Good to be True? Turn Any Model Differentially Private With DP-Weights
Authors:
David Zagardo
Abstract:
Imagine training a machine learning model with Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent (DP-SGD), only to discover post-training that the noise level was either too high, crippling your model's utility, or too low, compromising privacy. The dreaded realization hits: you must start the lengthy training process from scratch. But what if you could avoid this retraining nightmare? In this st…
▽ More
Imagine training a machine learning model with Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent (DP-SGD), only to discover post-training that the noise level was either too high, crippling your model's utility, or too low, compromising privacy. The dreaded realization hits: you must start the lengthy training process from scratch. But what if you could avoid this retraining nightmare? In this study, we introduce a groundbreaking approach (to our knowledge) that applies differential privacy noise to the model's weights after training. We offer a comprehensive mathematical proof for this novel approach's privacy bounds, use formal methods to validate its privacy guarantees, and empirically evaluate its effectiveness using membership inference attacks and performance evaluations. This method allows for a single training run, followed by post-hoc noise adjustments to achieve optimal privacy-utility trade-offs. We compare this novel fine-tuned model (DP-Weights model) to a traditional DP-SGD model, demonstrating that our approach yields statistically similar performance and privacy guarantees. Our results validate the efficacy of post-training noise application, promising significant time savings and flexibility in fine-tuning differential privacy parameters, making it a practical alternative for deploying differentially private models in real-world scenarios.
△ Less
Submitted 27 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
A More Practical Approach to Machine Unlearning
Authors:
David Zagardo
Abstract:
Machine learning models often incorporate vast amounts of data, raising significant privacy concerns. Machine unlearning, the ability to remove the influence of specific data points from a trained model, addresses these concerns. This paper explores practical methods for implementing machine unlearning, focusing on a first-epoch gradient-ascent approach.
Key findings include: 1. Single vs. Multi…
▽ More
Machine learning models often incorporate vast amounts of data, raising significant privacy concerns. Machine unlearning, the ability to remove the influence of specific data points from a trained model, addresses these concerns. This paper explores practical methods for implementing machine unlearning, focusing on a first-epoch gradient-ascent approach.
Key findings include: 1. Single vs. Multi-Epoch Unlearning: First-epoch gradient unlearning is more effective than multi-epoch gradients. 2. Layer-Based Unlearning: The embedding layer in GPT-2 is crucial for effective unlearning. Gradients from the output layers (11 and 12) have no impact. Efficient unlearning can be achieved using only the embedding layer, halving space complexity. 3. Influence Functions & Scoring: Techniques like Hessian Vector Product and the dot product of activations and tensors are used for quantifying unlearning. 4. Gradient Ascent Considerations: Calibration is necessary to avoid overexposing the model to specific data points during unlearning, which could prematurely terminate the process. 5. Fuzzy Matching vs. Iterative Unlearning: Fuzzy matching techniques shift the model to a new optimum, while iterative unlearning provides a more complete modality.
Our empirical evaluation confirms that first-epoch gradient ascent for machine unlearning is more effective than whole-model gradient ascent. These results highlight the potential of machine unlearning for enhancing data privacy and compliance with regulations such as GDPR and CCPA. The study underscores the importance of formal methods to comprehensively evaluate the unlearning process.
△ Less
Submitted 13 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.