Skellam Mixture Mechanism: a Novel Approach to Federated Learning with Differential Privacy
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Deep neural networks have strong capabilities of memorizing the underlying training data, which can be a serious privacy concern. An effective solution to this problem is to train models with differential privacy, which provides rigorous privacy guarantees by injecting random noise to the gradients. This paper focuses on the scenario where sensitive data are distributed among multiple participants, who jointly train a model through federated learning (FL), using both secure multiparty computation (MPC) to ensure the confidentiality of each gradient update, and differential privacy to avoid data leakage in the resulting model. A major challenge in this setting is that common mechanisms for enforcing DP in deep learning, which inject real-valued noise, are fundamentally incompatible with MPC, which exchanges finite-field integers among the participants. Consequently, most existing DP mechanisms require rather high noise levels, leading to poor model utility. Motivated by this, we propose Skellam mixture mechanism (SMM), an approach to enforce DP on models built via FL. Compared to existing methods, SMM eliminates the assumption that the input gradients must be integer-valued, and, thus, reduces the amount of noise injected to preserve DP. Further, SMM allows tight privacy accounting due to the nice composition and sub-sampling properties of the Skellam distribution, which are key to accurate deep learning with DP. The theoretical analysis of SMM is highly non-trivial, especially considering (i) the complicated math of differentially private deep learning in general and (ii) the fact that the mixture of two Skellam distributions is rather complex, and to our knowledge, has not been studied in the DP literature. Extensive experiments on various practical settings demonstrate that SMM consistently and significantly outperforms existing solutions in terms of the utility of the resulting model.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Dec 2022.
Builds on
26 of 58 references.
References · 26
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2016Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Datacited by 7,669
- 2017Fashion-MNIST: a Novel Image Dataset for Benchmarking Machine Learning Algorithmscited by 4,349
- 2016Deep Learning with Differential Privacycited by 2,728
- 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,281
- 2018The Secret Sharer: Evaluating and Testing Unintended Memorization in Neural Networkscited by 864
- 2017Renyi Differential Privacycited by 650
- 2018Exploiting Unintended Feature Leakage in Collaborative Learningcited by 520
- 2019Does Learning Require Memorization? A Short Tale about a Long Tailcited by 460
- 2018A Hybrid Approach to Privacy-Preserving Federated Learningcited by 210
- 2019R'enyi Differential Privacy of the Sampled Gaussian Mechanismcited by 204
14 more
- 2017Machine Learning Models that Remember Too Muchcited by 169
- 2018Amplification by Shuffling: From Local to Central Differential Privacy via Anonymitycited by 164
- 2018cpSGD: Communication-efficient and differentially-private distributed SGDcited by 158
- 2020The Discrete Gaussian for Differential Privacycited by 135
- 2021The Distributed Discrete Gaussian Mechanism for Federated Learning with Secure Aggregationcited by 128
- 2018Distributed Differential Privacy via Shufflingcited by 115
- 2021Hyperparameter Tuning with Renyi Differential Privacycited by 104
- 2018Comprehensive Privacy Analysis of Deep Learning: Passive and Active White-box Inference Attacks against Centralized and Federated Learningcited by 77
- 2019Overlearning Reveals Sensitive Attributescited by 76
- 2018Private Selection from Private Candidatescited by 75
- 2017Knock Knock, Who's There? Membership Inference on Aggregate Location Datacited by 70
- 2021The Skellam Mechanism for Differentially Private Federated Learningcited by 68
- 2020Tight Differential Privacy for Discrete-Valued Mechanisms and for the Subsampled Gaussian Mechanism Using FFTcited by 43
- 2017Computational Differential Privacy from Lattice-based Cryptographycited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 3; 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
7 papers.
- 2023A Survey for Federated Learning Evaluations: Goals and Measurescited by 16
- 2023Secure and Verifiable Data Collaboration with Low-Cost Zero-Knowledge Proofscited by 5
- 2024Private and Communication-Efficient Federated Learning based on Differentially Private Sketchescited by 2
- 2023SparDL: Distributed Deep Learning Training with Efficient Sparse Communicationcited by 0
- 2025An Empirical Study of the Impact of Federated Learning on Machine Learning Model Accuracycited by 0
- 2026SoK: Enhancing Cryptographic Collaborative Learning with Differential Privacycited by 0
- 2026Dithered Gaussian Mechanism for Randomness-Efficient Differential Privacycited by 0
- 2026Dithered Gaussian Mechanism for Randomness-Efficient Differential Privacy7 Jul 2026
- 2026SoK: Enhancing Cryptographic Collaborative Learning with Differential Privacy14 Jan 2026
- 2025An Empirical Study of the Impact of Federated Learning on Machine Learning Model Accuracy26 Mar 2025
- 2024Private and Communication-Efficient Federated Learning based on Differentially Private Sketches8 Oct 2024
- 2023Secure and Verifiable Data Collaboration with Low-Cost Zero-Knowledge Proofs26 Nov 2023
- 2023A Survey for Federated Learning Evaluations: Goals and Measures23 Aug 2023
- 2023SparDL: Distributed Deep Learning Training with Efficient Sparse Communication3 Apr 2023