Challenges in Enabling Private Data Valuation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Data valuation methods quantify how individual training examples contribute to a model's behavior, and are increasingly used for dataset curation, auditing, and emerging data markets. As these techniques become operational, they raise serious privacy concerns: valuation scores can reveal whether a person's data was included in training, whether it was unusually influential, or what sensitive patterns exist in proprietary datasets. This motivates the study of privacy-preserving data valuation. However, privacy is fundamentally in tension with valuation utility under differential privacy (DP). DP requires outputs to be insensitive to any single record, while valuation methods are explicitly designed to measure per-record influence. As a result, naive privatization often destroys the fine-grained distinctions needed to rank or attribute value, particularly in heterogeneous datasets where rare examples exert outsized effects. In this work, we analyze the feasibility of DP-compatible data valuation. We identify the core algorithmic primitives across common valuation frameworks that induce prohibitive sensitivity, explaining why straightforward DP mechanisms fail. We further derive design principles for more privacy-amenable valuation procedures and empirically characterize how privacy constraints degrade ranking fidelity across representative methods and datasets. Our results clarify the limits of current approaches and provide a foundation for developing valuation methods that remain useful under rigorous privacy guarantees.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Feb 2026.
Builds on
26 of 39 references.
References · 26
- 2016Deep Learning with Differential Privacycited by 2,682
- 2017Understanding Black-box Predictions via Influence Functionscited by 1,714
- 2015Optimizing Neural Networks with Kronecker-factored Approximate Curvaturecited by 776
- 2019Data Shapley: Equitable Valuation of Data for Machine Learningcited by 617
- 2020Estimating Training Data Influence by Tracing Gradient Descentcited by 565
- 2023Studying Large Language Model Generalization with Influence Functionscited by 311
- 2023TRAK: Attributing Model Behavior at Scalecited by 273
- 2020Influence Functions in Deep Learning Are Fragilecited by 247
- 2022Datamodels: Predicting Predictions from Training Datacited by 186
- 2021Beta Shapley: a Unified and Noise-reduced Data Valuation Framework for Machine Learningcited by 162
- 2019Efficient Task-Specific Data Valuation for Nearest Neighbor Algorithmscited by 147
- 2021Scaling Up Influence Functionscited by 130
14 more
- 2022Data Banzhaf: A Robust Data Valuation Framework for Machine Learningcited by 126
- 2023DataInf: Efficiently Estimating Data Influence in LoRA-tuned LLMs and Diffusion Modelscited by 121
- 2021Sampling Permutations for Shapley Value Estimationcited by 101
- 2018Privacy Amplification by Iterationcited by 97
- 2024Data Shapley in One Training Runcited by 76
- 2022Privacy of Noisy Stochastic Gradient Descent: More Iterations without More Privacy Losscited by 60
- 2022Differentially Private Learning Needs Hidden State (Or Much Faster Convergence)cited by 45
- 2020A Survey on Data Pricing: from Economics to Data Sciencecited by 39
- 2025MAGIC: Near-Optimal Data Attribution for Deep Learningcited by 20
- 2022Variance reduced Shapley value estimation for trustworthy data valuationcited by 16
- 2023Stabilizing Estimates of Shapley Values with Control Variatescited by 9
- 2022Differentially Private Shapley Values for Data Evaluationcited by 8
- 2024Convergent Privacy Loss of Noisy-SGD without Convexity and Smoothnesscited by 6
- 2025Taming Hyperparameter Sensitivity in Data Attribution: Practical Selection Without Costly Retrainingcited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.