Private Component-by-Component Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We study differentially private learning problems in the realizable setting, where a hypothesis is specified by k components. A direct iteration of private component learners is obstructed by a simple difficulty: an approximate choice of the next component may destroy exact realizability of the labeled sample, even when the next component is locally accurate. We restore realizability using the LabelBoost procedure of Beimel, Nissim, and Stemmer [SODA '15, Algorithmica '21] and recycle data through two alternating reservoirs. The resulting learner, for a target privacy varepsilon, pays only widetilde O(√k/varepsilon) overhead relative to the active sample requirement of a single component learning step at target accuracy Theta(α/k). For learning d-dimensional halfspaces over a finite coordinate grid of size L, exact realizability makes the direct component-depth objective quasi-concave. Instantiating the framework with the IPConcave algorithm of Nissim, Tsfadia, and Yan [SODA '26] and with the quasi-concave optimizer of Cohen, Lyu, Nelson, Sarl'os, and Stemmer [STOC '23] yields a realizable sample complexity of widetildeOleft(frac1varepsilon α· mind2.5 log^*L, :: d2.5 + d1.5 2log^*Lright), which improves on the previously known bound of widetildeOleft(frac1varepsilon α·minfrac1α· d5.5log^*L,:: d2.52log^*Lright). We also apply the framework to Boolean compositions: given proper private learners for classes H1,ldots,Hk, we obtain a proper private learner for G(H1,ldots,Hk) for any fixed Boolean function G:0,1k→0,1. Compared with the closure theorem of Alon, Beimel, Moran, and Stemmer [COLT '20], this reduces the overhead on a common component sample bound from widetilde O(k/varepsilon) to widetilde O(√k/varepsilon).
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Oct 2026.
Builds on
17 of 25 references.
References · 17
- 2021Convex optimizationcited by 2,515
- 2018Privacy Amplification by Subsampling: Tight Analyses via Couplings and Divergencescited by 242
- 2018Private PAC learning implies finite Littlestone dimensioncited by 74
- 2020An Equivalence Between Private Classification and Online Predictioncited by 64
- 2014Private Learning and Sanitization: Pure vs. Approximate Differential Privacycited by 63
- 2015Differentially Private Release and Learning of Threshold Functionscited by 60
- 2019Privately Learning Thresholds: Closing the Exponential Gapcited by 31
- 2022~Optimal Differentially Private Learning of Thresholds and Quasi-Concave Optimizationcited by 18
- 2020Closure Properties for Private Classification and Online Predictioncited by 16
- 2019Private Center Points and Learning of Halfspacescited by 14
- 2019Efficient Private Algorithms for Learning Large-Margin Halfspacescited by 13
- 2014Learning Privately with Labeled and Unlabeled Examplescited by 10
5 more
- 2020Private Learning of Halfspaces: Simplifying the Construction and Reducing the Sample Complexitycited by 9
- 2024On Differentially Private Linear Algebracited by 4
- 2021On the Sample Complexity of Privately Learning Axis-Aligned Rectanglescited by 3
- 2025Differentially Private Quasi-Concave Optimization: Bypassing the Lower Bound and Application to Geometric Problemscited by 3
- 2026Privately Learning Decision Lists and a Differentially Private Winnowcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.