arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2302.09511cs.CRcs.DB
收藏

差分隐私下的动态私有任务分配

Dynamic Private Task Assignment under Differential Privacy

Leilei Du, Peng Cheng, Libin Zheng, Wei Xi, Xuemin Lin, Wenjie Zhang, Jing Fang

摘要:

数据汇集对于空间众包服务,如资源分配、政策制定和科学探索是不可或缺的。然而,隐私问题使得用户在获得足够的补偿之前分享他们的信息具有挑战性。差分隐私(Differential Privacy,DP)是一种在保护个人隐私的同时发布有用信息的机制。然而,大多数DP机制只考虑对每个用户的隐私损失的固定补偿。在本文中,我们设计了一个任务分配方案,允许工人动态地提高他们的效用与动态距离隐私泄漏。具体来说,我们提出了两种解决方案,以提高任务分配结果的总效用,即私人效用消除(PUCE)的方法和私人博弈论(PGT)的方法,分别。我们证明,PUCE实现更高的效用比国家的最先进的作品。我们证明了我们的PUCE和PGT方法的效率和有效性的真实和合成数据集相比,最近的基于距离的方法,私人距离消除(PDCE)。PUCE总是略优于PDCE。PGT比PDCE快50%到63%,并且当工人范围足够大时,平均可以提高16%的效用。

英文摘要:

Data collection is indispensable for spatial crowdsourcing services, such as resource allocation, policymaking, and scientific explorations. However, privacy issues make it challenging for users to share their information unless receiving sufficient compensation. Differential Privacy (DP) is a promising mechanism to release helpful information while protecting individuals' privacy. However, most DP mechanisms only consider a fixed compensation for each user's privacy loss. In this paper, we design a task assignment scheme that allows workers to dynamically improve their utility with dynamic distance privacy leakage. Specifically, we propose two solutions to improve the total utility of task assignment results, namely Private Utility Conflict-Elimination (PUCE) approach and Private Game Theory (PGT) approach, respectively. We prove that PUCE achieves higher utility than the state-of-the-art works. We demonstrate the efficiency and effectiveness of our PUCE and PGT approaches on both real and synthetic data sets compared with the recent distance-based approach, Private Distance Conflict-Elimination (PDCE). PUCE is always better than PDCE slightly. PGT is 50% to 63% faster than PDCE and can improve 16% utility on average when worker range is large enough.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑