mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Trade-off Functions for DP-SGD with Subsampling based on Random Allocation: Tight Upper and Lower Bounds

arXiv 2605.06259 ↗First posted 7 May 2026cs.LG cs.CRcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Within the f-DP framework, we derive a tight analysis of the trade-off function for Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent (DP-SGD) with subsampling based on random allocation in which each sample is independently assigned to exactly one of M minibatches per epoch, each minibatch corresponding to one of the M SGD rounds within a single epoch. Our analysis holds under an explicit validity condition, whose hypotheses together force σ ≥ √3/ln M, where σ is the DP noise multiplier. Unlike f-DP analyses for Poisson subsampling, which yield non-closed implicit formulas that can be machine computed but are non-transparent, random allocation admits a tight analysis yielding transparent and interpretable closed-form bounds. For a single epoch, our concrete bounds, derived via the Berry-Esseen theorem, are tight up to constant factors. We demonstrate worked parameter settings for a single epoch (E=1) with a corresponding trade-off function ≥ 1-a-δ, that is, only δ below the ideal random guessing diagonal 1-a. For δ = 1/100 and σ = 1, roughly M ≈ 1.14× 106 rounds and N ≈ 1.14× 107 training samples suffice to achieve meaningful differential privacy. This is in contrast to recent negative results for the regime σ ≤ 1/√2 ln M for which no significant DP guarantee can exist.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 May 2026.

Builds on

26 of 36 references.

References · 26

  1. 2016Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Datacited by 7,592
  2. 2016Deep Learning with Differential Privacycited by 2,682
  3. 2016Concentrated Differential Privacy: Simplifications, Extensions, and Lower Boundscited by 339
  4. 2013The Composition Theorem for Differential Privacycited by 290
  5. 2018Privacy Amplification by Subsampling: Tight Analyses via Couplings and Divergencescited by 237
  6. 2018Subsampled R'enyi Differential Privacy and Analytical Moments Accountantcited by 234
  7. 2019R'enyi Differential Privacy of the Sampled Gaussian Mechanismcited by 199
  8. 2021Numerical Composition of Differential Privacycited by 174
  9. 2019Deep Learning with Gaussian Differential Privacycited by 112
  10. 2020Hiding Among the Clones: A Simple and Nearly Optimal Analysis of Privacy Amplification by Shufflingcited by 96
  11. 2022Connect the Dots: Tighter Discrete Approximations of Privacy Loss Distributionscited by 50
  12. 2020Privacy Amplification via Random Check-Inscited by 39
14 more
  1. 2024How Private are DP-SGD Implementations?cited by 22
  2. 2024Near Exact Privacy Amplification for Matrix Mechanismscited by 17
  3. 2024Scalable DP-SGD: Shuffling vs. Poisson Subsamplingcited by 16
  4. 2022Edgeworth Accountant: An Analytical Approach to Differential Privacy Compositioncited by 14
  5. 2020Sharp Composition Bounds for Gaussian Differential Privacy via Edgeworth Expansioncited by 13
  6. 2024Balls-and-Bins Sampling for DP-SGDcited by 13
  7. 2025Privacy amplification by random allocationcited by 13
  8. 2024Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent with Fixed-Size Minibatches: Tighter RDP Guarantees with or without Replacementcited by 7
  9. 2025Leveraging Randomness in Model and Data Partitioning for Privacy Amplificationcited by 7
  10. 2025Gaussian DP for Reporting Differential Privacy Guarantees in Machine Learningcited by 6
  11. 2022Shuffle Gaussian Mechanism for Differential Privacycited by 4
  12. 2026Fundamental Limitations of Favorable Privacy-Utility Guarantees for DP-SGDcited by 4
  13. 2026Efficient privacy loss accounting for subsampling and random allocationcited by 3
  14. 2021Proactive DP: A Multple Target Optimization Framework for DP-SGDcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.