Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Robustness Threats of Differential Privacy

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2012.07828 v3 pith:SZIGDRMP submitted 2020-12-14 cs.LG cs.CR

classification cs.LGcs.CR
keywords robustnessnetworksprivacymodelneuraldifferentdifferentialaccuracy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Differential privacy (DP) is a gold-standard concept of measuring and guaranteeing privacy in data analysis. It is well-known that the cost of adding DP to deep learning model is its accuracy. However, it remains unclear how it affects robustness of the model. Standard neural networks are not robust to different input perturbations: either adversarial attacks or common corruptions. In this paper, we empirically observe an interesting trade-off between privacy and robustness of neural networks. We experimentally demonstrate that networks, trained with DP, in some settings might be even more vulnerable in comparison to non-private versions. To explore this, we extensively study different robustness measurements, including FGSM and PGD adversaries, distance to linear decision boundaries, curvature profile, and performance on a corrupted dataset. Finally, we study how the main ingredients of differentially private neural networks training, such as gradient clipping and noise addition, affect (decrease and increase) the robustness of the model.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. How Context Attribution Handles What the Model Already Knows

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Context attribution methods cannot disentangle in-context from in-weight knowledge and assign unfaithful scores under overlap; new metrics and WMDP-Cyber++ quantify the failure.

  2. Reconciling Privacy and Explainability in High-Stakes: A Systematic Inquiry

    cs.CR 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Gradient-based explainers yield almost uncorrelated attributions on DP-trained chest X-ray models, so the authors recommend privatizing explanations from a non-private model instead.

Pith tools