Unified Privacy Guarantees for Decentralized Learning via Matrix Factorization
Aur\'elien Bellet, Edwige Cyffers, Davide Frey, Romaric Gaudel, Dimitri Ler\'ev\'erend, Fran\c{c}ois Ta\"iani

TL;DR
This paper introduces a unified framework using matrix factorization for tighter privacy accounting in decentralized learning, leading to improved privacy guarantees and the development of a new gossip-based algorithm that outperforms existing methods.
Contribution
It generalizes matrix factorization-based privacy accounting to decentralized learning, enabling tighter privacy bounds and the creation of a novel gossip-based algorithm.
Findings
Tighter privacy guarantees for DP in decentralized learning.
Introduction of MAFALDA-SGD, a gossip-based algorithm with improved performance.
Empirical validation on synthetic and real-world graphs.
Abstract
Decentralized Learning (DL) enables users to collaboratively train models without sharing raw data by iteratively averaging local updates with neighbors in a network graph. This setting is increasingly popular for its scalability and its ability to keep data local under user control. Strong privacy guarantees in DL are typically achieved through Differential Privacy (DP), with results showing that DL can even amplify privacy by disseminating noise across peer-to-peer communications. Yet in practice, the observed privacy-utility trade-off often appears worse than in centralized training, which may be due to limitations in current DP accounting methods for DL. In this paper, we show that recent advances in centralized DP accounting based on Matrix Factorization (MF) for analyzing temporal noise correlations can also be leveraged in DL. By generalizing existing MF results, we show how to…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2026 Poster
- Extends the centralized matrix factorization mechanism to decentralized learning, unifying several existing trust models (LDP, PNDP, SecLDP) and encompassing all known DP-DL algorithms within one framework. - Generalizes DP analysis to adaptive and non-square workload matrices through Theorem 7, enabling rigorous privacy guarantees for realistic decentralized and potentially other distributed systems. - Introduces a novel algorithm (MAFALDA-SGD) that optimizes local noise correlation, achiev
- The experimental section only include small graphs (the largest including only 271 nodes). Moreover, the models considered in section 7.2 is very small, an MLP with a single hidden layer. - There are no ablations on the effect of graph topology, participation patterns, or colluding attackers. - There is no complexity analysis of the new algorithm. - It is not clear how restrictive definition 3 is.
1. The paper derives neat theory with clean abstraction and provides a unified lens and extends to adaptive and rectangular cases. 2. The paper presents substantially tighter bounds on PNDP. 3. The paper presents a concrete algorithm Mafalda-SGD that is adoptable and easy to run after an offline correlation evaluation step. 4. Empirically results show strong performance across a lot of graphs.
1. Seemingly strong assumptions (e.g., linear DL (definition 3), column-echelon, and the knowledge of gossip matrix for MAFALDA-SGD) 2. Limited experimental scale 3. Computational overhead is not discussed Please see the questions section below for more details.
1. The background information and technical introduction are very detailed and the writing is well-organized. 2. The issue of distributed privacy protection is of great practical significance, and the utility-privacy trade-off faced by existing methods is more severe compared to that in the centralized approach. 3. Sufficient theoretical evidence shows that each step has detailed proofs.
1. The gap between theory and method implementation: The theoretical framework in Sections 4–5 establishes a very general condition for the MF mechanism. This suggests wide applicability to diverse decentralized algorithms and trust models. However, the proposed algorithm MAFALDA-SGD in Section 6 only instantiates this framework under a restricted setting: Local Differential Privacy (LDP) combined with node-local temporal correlation. 2. Additional computational overhead: MAFALDA-SGD algorithm r
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in Data · Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning · Stochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques
