Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byWilfred Rodgers Modified over 9 years ago
1
Private Approximation of Search Problems Amos Beimel Paz Carmi Kobbi Nissim Enav Weinreb (Technion)
2
x y Let’s compute f(x, y)!
3
x y No! You will learn too much information on my input!
4
x y Haven’t you heard of secure function evaluation?
5
x y Sure I’v heard of it...But for f it will be inefficient
6
x y That’s not a problem! We can approximate f by f* and do SFE on f*!
7
x y Hmmmm.... I don’t know...
8
What can go wrong? Example: f*(x, y) reveals Bob ’ s input. f(134, 285) = 64 f*(134, 285) = 64.285 f(847, 121) = 26 f*(847, 121) = 26.121 y Hmmm...
9
Background and Previous Work Definitions for Search Problems Impossibility Result for Vertex Cover Algorithms that Leak (Little) Information Positive Result for MAX-3SAT Problems in P Conclusions and Open Problems Talk Overview
10
Private Approximation [FIMNSW] f* is a private approximation for f: f* is an approximation of f. f*(x) gives no more information about x then f(x). Privacy definitions: f*(x) can be simulated given f(x). If f(x)=f(x’) then f*(x) and f*(x’) should be indistinguishable.
11
Positive results [FIMNSW] Hamming distance: Private approximation in communication O(√n). Improved to polylog(n) by [IW] Permanent: Private approximation in polynomial time.
12
PA of NP-Hard Functions [HKKN] Vertex Cover Input: undirected graph G=. A set is a vertex cover of G if for every, or. Functional: Return minimum vertex cover size. * We’ll discuss search version later.
13
G “ Would you tell me the vertex cover size of your graph? ” “ I would, but it is hard to compute. ” “ So, tell me an approximation! ” “ Hmmm …” SERVER CLIENT Client-Server Model
14
Maximal Matching Approximation Find maximal matching. Its vertices form a cover. 2-approximation: solution size is at most 2 times the optimal solution. 12 3 45 6
15
G “ So, tell me an approximation! ” “ Hmmm …” 12 3 45 6 12 3 45 6 VC Matching 22 24
16
Impossibility results [HKKN] If NP BPP there is no polynomial private n 1-ε -approximation algorithm for vertex cover size. Impossibility results for other NP- complete functions: MAX-SAT Vertex cover in planer graphs.
17
Background and Previous Work Definitions for Search Problems Impossibility Result for Vertex Cover Algorithms that Leak (Little) Information Positive Result for MAX-3SAT Problems in P Conclusions and Open Problems Talk Overview
18
Search problems Function - one output for every input. Search - many solutions for one input. Example: vertex cover Return a vertex cover of the graph (a set of vertices). What is the right definition of privacy? What pairs of inputs should not be distinguished by the output?
19
Step 1: Privacy w.r.t. a Relation R – Equivalence relation over the inputs A – Probabilistic algorithm A is private with respect to R if: x y A( ) ≈ c x y
20
Step 2: Defining the Relation Let P be a search problem. Let S(x) be the set of solutions to the input x. We say that x ≈ P y if x and y have the same set of solutions, that is, S(x)=S(y).
21
Example – Vertex Cover (Search) G 1 ≈ VC G 2 if they have the same set of minimum vertex covers. A is a private approximation algorithm for vertex cover if: A is an approximation algorithm for vertex cover. G 1 ≈ VC G 2 A(G 1 ) A(G 2 ) Can this be done efficiently? ≈ c ≈ VC 12 3 45 6 12 3 45 6 vertex cover sets: {2,3} and {3,5}
22
Search versus Functional In non-private computation: A lower bound for functional implies a lower bound for search. Private computation: Functional – equivalent (VC size = 2). Search – not equivalent ({2,4} is a VC only of the right graph). 12 34 12 34
23
Search versus Functional Can we use the lower bounds techniques of [HKKN] for functional vertex cover? No. [HKKN] relies on having few equivalence classes. In search - Huge number of equivalence classes.
24
Background and Previous Work Definitions for Search Problems Impossibility Result for Vertex Cover Algorithms that Leak (Little) Information Positive Result for MAX-3SAT Problems in P Conclusions and Open Problems Talk Overview
25
Vertex Cover - Impossibility Result Theorem 1 If P ≠NP there is no deterministic polynomial time n 1-ε -approximation algorithm for vertex cover. Proof idea: Given a private-approximation algorithm A, we construct a greedy algorithm that solves vertex cover exactly.
26
Definitions for the Proof Let be a graph. A vertex is critical for if every minimum vertex cover of contains. A vertex is relevant for if there exists a minimum vertex cover of that contains. Every vertex is non-critical or relevant (or both).
27
A Taste of the Proof Claim: Let be a graph and. If then both and are non critical for. A vertex is critical for if every minimum vertex cover of contains. The approximation’s answer teaches us about the optimal solution!
28
Proof of the Claim Let be a graph and. If then both and are non critical for. is non critical for. Privacy
29
Relevant / Non-Critical Problem Input Graph G Vertex v. Output - one of the following: v is Relevant for G. v is Non-Critical for G. Enables a greedy algorithm for Vertex Cover.
30
Claim 2 (Without proof) Polynomial private approximation algorithm for vertex cover (search) implies a polynomial algorithm for the Relevant/Non-Critical problem.
31
Vertex Cover - Impossibility Result Theorem 1 If P ≠NP there is no deterministic polynomial time n 1-ε -approximation algorithm for vertex cover. randomizedRP NP
32
Given a 3CNF formula find an assignment that satisfies a maximum fraction of its clauses. Best approximation ratio: 7/8. if and have the same set of maximum satisfying assignments. Again, no private approximation! MAX-3SAT
33
Background and Previous Work Definitions for Search Problems Impossibility Result for Vertex Cover Algorithms that Leak (Little) Information Positive Result for MAX-3SAT Problems in P Conclusions and Open Problems Talk Overview
34
Almost-Private Algorithms [HKKN] Let f be a function. f* is a private approximation for f that leaks k bits: f*(x) can be simulated from f(x) and another k bits of advice. Example: There is an efficient 4-approximation of vertex cover size that leaks 1 bit.
35
Almost-Private Algorithms - Search x y A( ) ≈ c w z ? x y z w
36
Almost-Private Algorithms is k-private with respect to if there exists such that: 1.. 2. Every equivalence class of is a union of at most equivalence classes of. 3. is private with respect to.
37
Search versus Functional Can we use the ideas of [HKKN] for functions to get efficient almost private algorithms for search problems? No. [HKKN] use rounding of the result of a non-private approximation. Not clear how to generalize to search problems.
38
Every equivalence class of is divided into subclasses. Almost Private Approximation for MAX-E3SAT and have the same set of maximum satisfying assignments. … …
39
Lemma 1 There is a set of assignments such that for every 3SAT formula on n variables there exists an that satisfies of the clauses in. Proof: Construct almost 3-wise [NN, AGHP] independent variables. Number of assignments:.
40
Proof of Lemma 1 (cont.) For every 3 random variables and every 3 Boolean values : Conclusion 1: For each clause : over the choice of. Conclusion 2: For every formula there is an assignment that satisfies of its clauses.
41
Almost Private Approximation for MAX-3SAT Theorem 2 There exists a -private -approximation algorithm for MAX-3SAT. Proof: We use from Lemma 1. Given a formula return the first that satisfies at least of the clauses in.
42
Solution-List Paradigm A short list of solutions. Every input has a good approximation in the list. 2 k solutions k-private algorithm
43
Background and Previous Work Definitions for Search Problems Impossibility Result for Vertex Cover Algorithms that Leak (Little) Information Positive Result for MAX-3SAT Problems in P Conclusions and Open Problems Talk Overview
44
Problems in P - Private Computation Let S be a search problem in P. (Example: shortest-path) Recall that x ≈ S y if x and y have the same set of solutions. For a private algorithm we require: A(x) ≈ c A(y) Is there a private algorithm for every problem in P? No!
45
Impossibility result for a Problem in P Input: G=, C, k Output: If C is a clique of size k in G then output a clique of size k in G. The problem is in P because C is a legal output. A private algorithm implies a non- uniform algorithm for Clique.
46
Positive Results for Problems in P Any problem S for which we can find: The lexicographically first solution x ≈ S y implies x and y have the same lex first solution. A random solution x ≈ S y implies that a random solution distributes identically for x and y. Examples: perfect matching, shortest path, linear algebra, and more...
47
Discussion – Strength of Definition We said the definition is minimal – good for impossibility results. Is it strong enough for positive results? Can returning the lex first solution be considered private? What is the right sufficient definition? (work in progress...)
48
Background and Previous Work Definitions for Search Problems Impossibility Result for Vertex Cover Algorithms that Leak (Little) Information Positive Result for MAX-3SAT Problems in P Conclusions and Open Problems Talk Overview
49
Further Results Impossibility result for (any) (log n)-private -approximation algorithm for vertex cover. Solution-list -approximation algorithm for vertex cover that leaks bits. [BHN07] improved the lower bound to show that the solution-list algorithm is optimal.
50
Conclusions Defined private approximation of search problems Impossibility result for private approximation of vertex cover Defined k-private approximation algorithms for search problems Positive result for MAX-3SAT Private computation of problems in P
51
Open Problems More private approximation algorithms. Design algorithms that defeat solution list algorithms. Private computation of problems in P. What is the right (sufficient) definition? What search problems admit efficient private computation?
53
Vertex Cover - Impossibility Result Theorem 1 If P ≠NP there is no deterministic polynomial time n 1-ε -approximation algorithm that is private with respect to ≈ VC. Proof Idea: Given a private n 1-ε -approximation algorithm A, we exactly solve vertex cover.
54
Definitions for the Proof Let be a graph. A vertex is critical for if every minimum vertex cover of contains. A vertex is relevant for if there exists a minimum vertex cover of that contains. Every vertex is non-critical or relevant (or both).
55
Claim 1 Let be a graph and. If then both and are non critical for. Note: The claim is useless if.
56
Proof of Claim 1 Let be a graph and. If then both and are non critical for. is non critical for. Privacy
57
Relevant / Non-Critical Algorithm Input Graph G Vertex v. Output - one of the following: v is Relevant for G. v is Non-Critical for G. Enables a greedy algorithm for Vertex Cover.
58
Relevant / Non-Critical Algorithm Let Is ? I is a big set of isolated vertices.
59
Case 1 is non critical for. Privacy (If was critical for, both copies of would be critical for.)
60
Case 2 By Claim 1 is not critical for.Claim 1 Let be the size of the minimum vertex cover of. Thus, there exists a minimum cover of that does not contain.
61
Case 2 (cont.) Assume is not relevant for. must contain both copies of as it does not contain. Thus, contains two non-optimal vertex covers of
62
Case 2 (cont. ii) However, taking two minimal covers of and adding results in a cover for of size. Contradiction to the minimality of Hence, is relevant for.
63
Relevant / Non-Critical (Summary) On input ( ): Define the graph. Compute. Choose. Define the graph. If, output: “ is Non-Critical for. ” If, output: “ is Relevant for. ”
64
Greedy Vertex Cover Choose an arbitrary vertex. Execute the Relevant/Non-Critical algorithm on. If is Relevant, take and delete all edges adjacent to. If is Non-Critical, take and delete all edges adjacent to. Continue recursively.
65
Vertex Cover - Impossibility Result Theorem 1 If P ≠NP there is no deterministic polynomial time n 1-ε -approximation algorithm for vertex cover. randomizedRP NP
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.