Private PAC Learning May be Harder than Online Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We continue the study of the computational complexity of differentially private PAC learning and how it is situated within the foundations of machine learning. A recent line of work uncovered a qualitative equivalence between the private PAC model and Littlestone's mistake-bounded model of online learning, in particular, showing that any concept class of Littlestone dimension d can be privately PAC learned using poly(d) samples. This raises the natural question of whether there might be a generic conversion from online learners to private PAC learners that also preserves computational efficiency. We give a negative answer to this question under reasonable cryptographic assumptions (roughly, those from which it is possible to build indistinguishability obfuscation for all circuits). We exhibit a concept class that admits an online learner running in polynomial time with a polynomial mistake bound, but for which there is no computationally-efficient differentially private PAC learner. Our construction and analysis strengthens and generalizes that of Bun and Zhandry (TCC 2016-A), who established such a separation between private and non-private PAC learner.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Feb 2024.
Builds on
18 of 48 references.
References · 18
- 2018Privacy Amplification by Subsampling: Tight Analyses via Couplings and Divergencescited by 237
- 2018Private PAC learning implies finite Littlestone dimensioncited by 73
- 2014Private Learning and Sanitization: Pure vs. Approximate Differential Privacycited by 62
- 2015Differentially Private Release and Learning of Threshold Functionscited by 58
- 2017The Price of Differential Privacy For Online Learningcited by 44
- 2023Stability is Stable: Connections between Replicability, Privacy, and Adaptive Generalizationcited by 42
- 2014Preventing False Discovery in Interactive Data Analysis is Hardcited by 34
- 2014Sample Complexity Bounds on Differentially Private Learning via Communication Complexitycited by 31
- 2019Privately Learning Thresholds: Closing the Exponential Gapcited by 30
- 2020Sample-efficient proper PAC learning with approximate differential privacycited by 29
- 2022Private Online Prediction from Experts: Separations and Faster Ratescited by 17
- 2020Indistinguishability Obfuscation from Well-Founded Assumptionscited by 12
6 more
- 2019Private Learning Implies Online Learning: An Efficient Reductioncited by 10
- 2020A Computational Separation between Private Learning and Online Learningcited by 8
- 2022Improved Inapproximability of VC Dimension and Littlestone's Dimension via (Unbalanced) Bicliquecited by 7
- 2015Order-Revealing Encryption and the Hardness of Private Learningcited by 3
- 2021On the Sample Complexity of Privately Learning Axis-Aligned Rectanglescited by 2
- 2021Tighter Bounds on Multi-Party Coin Flipping via Augmented Weak Martingales and Differentially Private Samplingcited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2024On the Computational Landscape of Replicable Learningcited by 7
- 2024Exploration is Harder than Prediction: Cryptographically Separating Reinforcement Learning from Supervised Learningcited by 6
- 2025Private Learning of Littlestone Classes, Revisitedcited by 3
- 2026Expressivity of Contradiction Graphscited by 0
- 2026Expressivity of Contradiction Graphs19 May 2026
- 2025Private Learning of Littlestone Classes, Revisited30 Sep 2025
- 2024On the Computational Landscape of Replicable Learning24 May 2024
- 2024Exploration is Harder than Prediction: Cryptographically Separating Reinforcement Learning from Supervised Learning4 Apr 2024