Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

How Private Are Commonly-Used Voting Rules?

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 1805.05750 v2 pith:CMDZFCV3 submitted 2018-05-15 cs.CR cs.GT

classification cs.CRcs.GT
keywords rulesvotingprivacycommonly-useddeterministicdifferentialexactfirst
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Differential privacy has been widely applied to provide privacy guarantees by adding random noise to the function output. However, it inevitably fails in many high-stakes voting scenarios, where voting rules are required to be deterministic. In this work, we present the first framework for answering the question: "How private are commonly-used voting rules?" Our answers are two-fold. First, we show that deterministic voting rules provide sufficient privacy in the sense of distributional differential privacy (DDP). We show that assuming the adversarial observer has uncertainty about individual votes, even publishing the histogram of votes achieves good DDP. Second, we introduce the notion of exact privacy to compare the privacy preserved in various commonly-studied voting rules, and obtain dichotomy theorems of exact DDP within a large subset of voting rules called generalized scoring rules.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Private Rank Aggregation under Local Differential Privacy

    cs.DS 2019-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LDP-KwikSort:RR provides locally differentially private rank aggregation, with an error bound under Mallows data and the best empirical utility when each agent answers about half the privacy budget in pairwise queries.

Pith tools