Differentially Private Conformal Prediction via Quantile Binary Search
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Most Differentially Private (DP) approaches focus on limiting privacy leakage from learners based on the data that they are trained on, there are fewer approaches that consider leakage when procedures involve a calibration dataset which is common in uncertainty quantification methods such as Conformal Prediction (CP). Since there is a limited amount of approaches in this direction, in this work we deliver a general DP approach for CP that we call Private Conformity via Quantile Search (P-COQS). The proposed approach adapts an existing randomized binary search algorithm for computing DP quantiles in the calibration phase of CP thereby guaranteeing privacy of the consequent prediction sets. This however comes at a price of slightly under-covering with respect to the desired (1 - α)-level when using finite-sample calibration sets (although broad empirical results show that the P-COQS generally targets the required level in the considered cases). Confirming properties of the adapted algorithm and quantifying the approximate coverage guarantees of the consequent CP, we conduct extensive experiments to examine the effects of privacy noise, sample size and significance level on the performance of our approach compared to existing alternatives. In addition, we empirically evaluate our approach on several benchmark datasets, including CIFAR-10, ImageNet and CoronaHack. Our results suggest that the proposed method is robust to privacy noise and performs favorably with respect to the current DP alternative in terms of empirical coverage, efficiency, and informativeness. Specifically, the results indicate that P-COQS produces smaller conformal prediction sets while simultaneously targeting the desired coverage and privacy guarantees in all these experimental settings.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jul 2025.
Builds on
19 of 40 references.
References · 19
- 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,448
- 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,926
- 2017What Uncertainties Do We Need in Bayesian Deep Learning for Computer Vision?cited by 2,352
- 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,281
- 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,189
- 2021A Gentle Introduction to Conformal Prediction and Distribution-Free Uncertainty Quantificationcited by 792
- 2016Distribution-Free Predictive Inference For Regressioncited by 668
- 2015Weight Uncertainty in Neural Networkscited by 554
- 2016Deep Exploration via Bootstrapped DQNcited by 527
- 2019Conformal Prediction Under Covariate Shiftcited by 519
- 2021Adaptive Conformal Inference Under Distribution Shiftcited by 375
- 2016Concentrated Differential Privacy: Simplifications, Extensions, and Lower Boundscited by 346
7 more
- 2013A Conformal Prediction Approach to Explore Functional Datacited by 86
- 2021Instance-optimal Mean Estimation Under Differential Privacycited by 37
- 2023One-Shot Federated Conformal Predictioncited by 27
- 2021Private Prediction Setscited by 17
- 2024Conformal Predictive Systems Under Covariate Shiftcited by 5
- 2025Tightening optimality gap with confidence through conformal predictioncited by 2
- 2025Privacy-Preserving Conformal Prediction Under Local Differential Privacycited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.