Differentially Private Joint Independence Test
差分隐私下的联合独立性检验AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要主体为通用联合独立性检验与差分隐私理论,因果推断仅作为实证应用出现,尚不足以确定给定经济计量细分方向。
差分隐私下的联合独立性检验AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
Identification of joint dependence among several random vectors plays an important role in many statistical applications, where the data may contain sensitive or confidential information. In this paper, we consider the $d$-variable Hilbert-Schmidt independence criterion (dHSIC) in the context of differential privacy. Given that the limiting distribution of the empirical estimate of dHSIC is a complicated Gaussian chaos, constructing tests in the non-private regime is typically based on permutation and bootstrap methods. To detect joint dependence under privacy constraints, we propose a dHSIC-based testing procedure employing a differentially private permutation methodology. We show that our method enjoys privacy guarantees, a valid level, and pointwise consistency, whereas the bootstrap counterpart suffers from inconsistent power. We further investigate the uniform power of the proposed test under the dHSIC and $L_2$ metrics, showing that the proposed test attains the minimax optimal power across different privacy regimes. As a byproduct, we show that the non-private permutation dHSIC test proposed in Pfister et al. (2018) is a special case of our differentially private permutation test, and our results also establish its pointwise and uniform power--thus resolving an open problem from that work. Both numerical simulations and real data analysis in causal inference suggest that our proposed test performs well empirically.