Optimal Bounds for Private Minimum Spanning Trees via Input Perturbation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We study the problem of privately releasing an approximate minimum spanning tree (MST). Given a graph G = (V, E, vecW) where V is a set of n vertices, E is a set of m undirected edges, and vecW ∈ ℝ|E| is an edge-weight vector, our goal is to publish an approximate MST under edge-weight differential privacy, as introduced by Sealfon in PODS 2016, where V and E are considered public and the weight vector is private. Our neighboring relation is ℓ_∞-distance on weights: for a sensitivity parameter Delta_∞, graphs G = (V, E, vecW) and G' = (V, E, vecW') are neighboring if |vecW-vecW'|_∞ ≤ Delta_∞. Existing private MST algorithms face a trade-off, sacrificing either computational efficiency or accuracy. We show that it is possible to get the best of both worlds: With a suitable random perturbation of the input that does not suffice to make the weight vector private, the result of any non-private MST algorithm will be private and achieves a state-of-the-art error guarantee. Furthermore, by establishing a connection to Private Top-k Selection [Steinke and Ullman, FOCS '17], we give the first privacy-utility trade-off lower bound for MST under approximate differential privacy, demonstrating that the error magnitude, tildeO(n3/2), is optimal up to logarithmic factors. That is, our approach matches the time complexity of any non-private MST algorithm and at the same time achieves optimal error. We complement our theoretical treatment with experiments that confirm the practicality of our approach.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Dec 2024.
Builds on
10 of 41 references.
References · 10
- 2016Concentrated Differential Privacy: Simplifications, Extensions, and Lower Boundscited by 346
- 2021Winning the NIST Contest: A scalable and general approach to differentially private synthetic datacited by 102
- 2019Practical Differentially Private Top-k Selection with Pay-what-you-get Compositioncited by 39
- 2017Tight Lower Bounds for Differentially Private Selectioncited by 34
- 2020Permute-and-Flip: A new mechanism for differentially private selectioncited by 22
- 2021Oneshot Differentially Private Top-k Selectioncited by 16
- 2021Private Graph Data Release: A Surveycited by 15
- 2015Shortest Paths and Distances with Differential Privacycited by 6
- 2018Minimum spanning tree release under differential privacy constraintscited by 4
- 2018Graph-based Clustering under Differential Privacycited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.