Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Almost Tight Bounds for Differentially Private Densest Subgraph

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 2308.10316 v3 pith:UDRGZVFS submitted 2023-08-20 cs.DS

classification cs.DS
keywords privacydensestdifferentiallosssubgraphadditivegiveproblem
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

We study the Densest Subgraph (DSG) problem under the additional constraint of differential privacy. DSG is a fundamental theoretical question which plays a central role in graph analytics, and so privacy is a natural requirement. All known private algorithms for Densest Subgraph lose constant multiplicative factors, despite the existence of non-private exact algorithms. We show that, perhaps surprisingly, this loss is not necessary: in both the classic differential privacy model and the LEDP model (local edge differential privacy, introduced recently by Dhulipala et al. [FOCS 2022]), we give $(\epsilon, \delta)$-differentially private algorithms with no multiplicative loss whatsoever. In other words, the loss is \emph{purely additive}. Moreover, our additive losses match or improve the best-known previous additive loss (in any version of differential privacy) when $1/\delta$ is polynomial in $n$, and are almost tight: in the centralized setting, our additive loss is $O(\log n /\epsilon)$ while there is a known lower bound of $\Omega(\sqrt{\log n / \epsilon})$. We also give a number of extensions. First, we show how to extend our techniques to both the node-weighted and the directed versions of the problem. Second, we give a separate algorithm with pure differential privacy (as opposed to approximate DP) but with worse approximation bounds. And third, we give a new algorithm for privately computing the optimal density which implies a separation between the structural problem of privately computing the densest subgraph and the numeric problem of privately computing the density of the densest subgraph.

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. Practical and Accurate Local Edge Differentially Private Graph Algorithms

    cs.DS 2025-06 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    New LEDP k-core and triangle-counting algorithms replace edge-count error bounds with degree- and degeneracy-based bounds, and are evaluated in a distributed simulation with reported accuracy improvements.

  2. Common Neighborhood Estimation over Bipartite Graphs under Local Differential Privacy

    cs.DB 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A multi-round protocol combining randomized response and Laplace noise gives unbiased, low-variance estimates of common-neighbor counts in bipartite graphs under edge local differential privacy.

Pith tools