How robust are linear sketches to adaptive inputs?

Linear sketches are powerful algorithmic tools that turn an n-dimensional input into a concise lower-dimensional representation via a linear transformation. Such sketches have seen a wide range of applications including norm estimation over data streams, compressed sensing, and distributed computing. In almost any realistic setting, however, a linear sketch faces the possibility that its inputs are correlated with previous evaluations of the sketch. Known techniques no longer guarantee the correctness of the output in the presence of such correlations. We therefore ask: Are linear sketches inherently non-robust to adaptively chosen inputs? We give a strong affirmative answer to this question. Specifically, we show that no linear sketch approximates the Euclidean norm of its input to within an arbitrary multiplicative approximation factor on a polynomial number of adaptively chosen inputs. The result remains true even if the dimension of the sketch is d=n-o(n) and the sketch is given unbounded computation time. Our result is based on an algorithm with running time polynomial in d that adaptively finds a distribution over inputs on which the sketch is incorrect with constant probability. Our result implies several corollaries for related problems including lp-norm estimation and compressed sensing. Notably, we resolve an open problem in compressed sensing regarding the feasibility of l2/l2-recovery guarantees in presence of computationally bounded adversaries.

[1]  Noga Alon,et al.  The space complexity of approximating the frequency moments , 1996, STOC '96.

[2]  Joseph T. Chang,et al.  Conditioning as disintegration , 1997 .

[3]  Wei Hong,et al.  Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation Tag: a Tiny Aggregation Service for Ad-hoc Sensor Networks , 2022 .

[4]  S. Muthukrishnan,et al.  Data streams: algorithms and applications , 2005, SODA '03.

[5]  Cynthia Dwork,et al.  Calibrating Noise to Sensitivity in Private Data Analysis , 2006, TCC.

[6]  Graham Cormode,et al.  Algorithms for distributed functional monitoring , 2008, SODA '08.

[7]  Moni Naor,et al.  Sketching in adversarial environments , 2008, STOC.

[8]  Toniann Pitassi,et al.  The Limits of Two-Party Differential Privacy , 2010, 2010 IEEE 51st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[9]  Guy N. Rothblum,et al.  A Multiplicative Weights Mechanism for Privacy-Preserving Data Analysis , 2010, 2010 IEEE 51st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[10]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Interactive privacy via the median mechanism , 2009, STOC '10.

[11]  David P. Woodruff,et al.  On the Power of Adaptivity in Sparse Recovery , 2011, 2011 IEEE 52nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[12]  Atri Rudra,et al.  Recovering simple signals , 2012, 2012 Information Theory and Applications Workshop.

[13]  Moni Naor,et al.  The Privacy of the Analyst and the Power of the State , 2012, FOCS.

[14]  David P. Woodruff,et al.  Reusable low-error compressive sampling schemes through privacy , 2012, 2012 IEEE Statistical Signal Processing Workshop (SSP).

[15]  Sudipto Guha,et al.  Graph sketches: sparsification, spanners, and subgraphs , 2012, PODS.

[16]  Sudipto Guha,et al.  Analyzing graph structure via linear measurements , 2012, SODA.

[17]  David P. Woodruff,et al.  Lower Bounds for Adaptive Sparse Recovery , 2012, SODA.