REVIEW 2 cited by
Differentially Private Tabular Data Synthesis using Large Language Models
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
read the original abstract
Synthetic tabular data generation with differential privacy is a crucial problem to enable data sharing with formal privacy. Despite a rich history of methodological research and development, developing differentially private tabular data generators that can provide realistic synthetic datasets remains challenging. This paper introduces DP-LLMTGen -- a novel framework for differentially private tabular data synthesis that leverages pretrained large language models (LLMs). DP-LLMTGen models sensitive datasets using a two-stage fine-tuning procedure with a novel loss function specifically designed for tabular data. Subsequently, it generates synthetic data through sampling the fine-tuned LLMs. Our empirical evaluation demonstrates that DP-LLMTGen outperforms a variety of existing mechanisms across multiple datasets and privacy settings. Additionally, we conduct an ablation study and several experimental analyses to deepen our understanding of LLMs in addressing this important problem. Finally, we highlight the controllable generation ability of DP-LLMTGen through a fairness-constrained generation setting.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Clustering and Median Aggregation Improve Differentially Private Inference
Clustering seed texts and privately aggregating median token logits improves representativeness and reduces reported privacy cost for DP synthetic text generation.
-
A Survey on Evaluating Quality and Trustworthiness in LLM-Generated Data
A metric-oriented survey that classifies intrinsic quality and trustworthiness metrics for LLM-generated data across six modalities and documents systematic evaluation gaps in the current literature.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.