The Adverse Effects of Omitting Records in Differential Privacy: How Sampling and Suppression Degrade the Privacy–Utility Tradeoff

Sampling is renowned for its privacy amplification in differential privacy (DP), and is often assumed to improve the utility of a DP mechanism by allowing a noise reduction. In this paper, we further show that this last assumption is flawed: When measuring utility at equal privacy levels, sampling as preprocessing consistently yields penalties due to utility loss from omitting records over all canonical DP mechanisms— Laplace, Gaussian, exponential, and report noisy max—, as well as recent applications of sampling, such as clustering. Extending this analysis, we investigate suppression as a generalized method of choosing, or omitting, records. Developing a theoretical analysis of this technique, we derive privacy bounds for arbitrary suppression strategies under unbounded approximate DP. We find that our tested suppression strategy also fails to improve the privacy–utility tradeoff. Surprisingly, uniform sampling emerges as one of the best suppression methods—despite its still degrading effect. Our results call into question common preprocessing assumptions in DP practice.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
KITopen
Published
2026-09-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5445/ir/1000196931
Primary Topic
Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Adverse Effects of Omitting Records in Differential Privacy: How Sampling and Suppression Degrade the Privacy–Utility Tradeoff

Àlex Miranda-Pascual, Javier Parra‐Arnau, Thorsten Strufe
KITopen
Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
article

The Adverse Effects of Omitting Records in Differential Privacy: How Sampling and Suppression Degrade the Privacy–Utility Tradeoff

Àlex Miranda-Pascual, Javier Parra‐Arnau, Thorsten Strufe
article en

Abstract

Sampling is renowned for its privacy amplification in differential privacy (DP), and is often assumed to improve the utility of a DP mechanism by allowing a noise reduction. In this paper, we further show that this last assumption is flawed: When measuring utility at equal privacy levels, sampling as preprocessing consistently yields penalties due to utility loss from omitting records over all canonical DP mechanisms— Laplace, Gaussian, exponential, and report noisy max—, as well as recent applications of sampling, such as clustering. Extending this analysis, we investigate suppression as a generalized method of choosing, or omitting, records. Developing a theoretical analysis of this technique, we derive privacy bounds for arbitrary suppression strategies under unbounded approximate DP. We find that our tested suppression strategy also fails to improve the privacy–utility tradeoff. Surprisingly, uniform sampling emerges as one of the best suppression methods—despite its still degrading effect. Our results call into question common preprocessing assumptions in DP practice.

KITopen
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.