Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent with Fixed-Size Minibatches: Tighter RDP Guarantees with or without Replacement
Jeremiah Birrell, Reza Ebrahimi, Rouzbeh Behnia, Jason Pacheco
Abstract
Differentially private stochastic gradient descent (DP-SGD) has been instrumental in privately training deep learning models by providing a framework to control and track the privacy loss incurred during training. At the core of this computation lies a subsampling method that uses a privacy amplification lemma to enhance the privacy guarantees provided by the additive noise. Fixed size subsampling is appealing for its constant memory usage, unlike the variable sized minibatches in Poisson subsampling. It is also of interest in addressing class imbalance and federated learning. However, the current computable guarantees for fixed-size subsampling are not tight and do not consider both add/remove and replace-one adjacency relationships. We present a new and holistic Rényi differential privacy (RDP) accountant for DP-SGD with fixed-size subsampling without replacement (FSwoR) and with replacement (FSwR). For FSwoR we consider both add/remove and replace-one adjacency. Our FSwoR results improves on the best current computable bound by a factor of 4. We also show for the first time that the widely-used Poisson subsampling and FSwoR with replace-one adjacency have the same privacy to leading order in the sampling probability. Accordingly, our work suggests that FSwoR is often preferable to Poisson subsampling due to constant memory usage. Our FSwR accountant includes explicit non-asymptotic upper and lower bounds and, to the authors' knowledge, is the first such analysis of fixed-size RDP with replacement for DP-SGD. We analytically and empirically compare fixed size and Poisson subsampling, and show that DP-SGD gradients in a fixed-size subsampling regime exhibit lower variance in practice in addition to memory usage benefits. Preprint. Under review.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext efef4b06-6848-4033-92ad-c7a2476bd649Cited by top-tier papers3
- Fundamental Limitations of Favorable Privacy–Utility Guarantees for DP-SGDMurat Bilgehan Ertan), Marten van Dijk)CCS 2026 · 3 citations
- WinFLoRA: Incentivizing Client-Adaptive Aggregation in Federated LoRA under Privacy HeterogeneityMengsha Kou, Xiaoyu Xia, Ziqi Wang, Ibrahim Khalil et al.WWW 2026 · 1 citation
- Continual Learning With Participation Privacy: An Auditable Buffering-Aggregation RecipeHubert Chan, Elaine Shi, Mengshi Zhao, Mingxun ZhouICML 2026
Builds on4
- Deep Learning with Differential PrivacyMartín Abadi, Andy Chu, Ian J. Goodfellow, H. Brendan McMahan et al.CCS 2016 · 7,620 citations
- Numerical Composition of Differential PrivacySivakanth Gopi, Yin Tat Lee, Lukas WutschitzNeurIPS 2021 · 259 citations
- Bounding training data reconstruction in DP-SGDJamie Hayes, Borja Balle, Saeed MahloujifarNeurIPS 2023 · 73 citations
- The Saddle-Point Method in Differential PrivacyWael Alghamdi, Juan Felipe Gómez, Shahab Asoodeh, Flávio P. Calmon et al.ICML 2023 · 16 citations
Related papers
- Practical and Private (Deep) Learning Without Sampling or ShufflingPeter Kairouz, Brendan McMahan, Shuang Song, Om Thakkar et al.ICML 2021 · 239 citations
- Wasserstein Differential PrivacyChengyi Yang, Jiayin Qi, Aimin ZhouAAAI 2024 · 4 citations
- To Shuffle or not to Shuffle: Auditing DP-SGD with ShufflingMeenatchi Sundaram Muthu Selva Annamalai, Borja Balle, Jamie Hayes, Emiliano De CristofaroNDSS 2026 · 11 citations
- How Private are DP-SGD Implementations?Lynn Chua, Badih Ghazi, Pritish Kamath, Ravi Kumar et al.ICML 2024 · 25 citations
- Unified Mechanism-Specific Amplification by Subsampling and Group Privacy AmplificationJan Schuchardt, Mihail Stoian, Arthur Kosmala, Stephan GünnemannNeurIPS 2024 · 8 citations
