Disparate Impact on Group Accuracy of Linearization for Private Inference
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Ensuring privacy-preserving inference on cryptographically secure data is a well-known computational challenge. To alleviate the bottleneck of costly cryptographic computations in non-linear activations, recent methods have suggested linearizing a targeted portion of these activations in neural networks. This technique results in significantly reduced runtimes with often negligible impacts on accuracy. In this paper, we demonstrate that such computational benefits may lead to increased fairness costs. Specifically, we find that reducing the number of ReLU activations disproportionately decreases the accuracy for minority groups compared to majority groups. To explain these observations, we provide a mathematical interpretation under restricted assumptions about the nature of the decision boundary, while also showing the prevalence of this problem across widely used datasets and architectures. Finally, we show how a simple procedure altering the fine-tuning step for linearized models can serve as an effective mitigation strategy.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Feb 2024.
Builds on
26 of 35 references.
References · 26
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2019Certified Adversarial Robustness via Randomized Smoothingcited by 1,324
- 2016Error bounds for approximations with deep ReLU networkscited by 567
- 2017Age Progression/Regression by Conditional Adversarial Autoencodercited by 426
- 2014On the Number of Linear Regions of Deep Neural Networkscited by 378
- 2018Fairness Without Demographics in Repeated Loss Minimizationcited by 363
- 2017The Expressive Power of Neural Networks: A View from the Widthcited by 318
- 2019Differential Privacy Has Disparate Impact on Model Accuracycited by 316
- 2016Understanding Deep Neural Networks with Rectified Linear Unitscited by 253
- 2020Fairness without Demographics through Adversarially Reweighted Learningcited by 251
- 2019What Do Compressed Deep Neural Networks Forget?cited by 164
- 2020Characterising Bias in Compressed Modelscited by 162
14 more
- 2019Deep ReLU Networks Have Surprisingly Few Activation Patternscited by 160
- 2021Optimal Approximation Rate of ReLU Networks in terms of Width and Depthcited by 95
- 2018ResNet with one-neuron hidden layers is a Universal Approximatorcited by 78
- 2020Lagrangian Duality for Constrained Deep Learningcited by 72
- 2020Neither Private Nor Fair: Impact of Data Imbalance on Utility and Fairness in Differential Privacycited by 61
- 2021DeepReDuce: ReLU Reduction for Fast Private Inferencecited by 50
- 2020CryptoNAS: Private Inference on a ReLU Budgetcited by 40
- 2022Selective Network Linearization for Efficient Private Inferencecited by 31
- 2021Teacher's pet: understanding and mitigating biases in distillationcited by 20
- 2023Learning to Linearize Deep Neural Networks for Secure and Efficient Private Inferencecited by 20
- 2020Going Beyond Classification Accuracy Metrics in Model Compressioncited by 15
- 2021Simon Says: Evaluating and Mitigating Bias in Pruned Neural Networks with Knowledge Distillationcited by 14
- 2019Optimal Function Approximation with Relu Neural Networkscited by 9
- 2015Expressiveness of Rectifier Networkscited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 1.
2 papers.