Bernoulli-Based Differential Privacy Mechanisms

• Bernoulli-based differentially private mechanisms are randomized algorithms that use Bernoulli and geometric trials to generate staircase noise distributions for privacy preservation.
• They optimize privacy-utility trade-offs by employing staircase mechanisms, geometric mixtures, and thresholding strategies across query and streaming data scenarios.
• These mechanisms underpin theoretical innovations and practical implementations in private data release, locally private protocols, and privacy amplification methods.

A Bernoulli-based differentially private mechanism is any randomized algorithm for data release, inference, or online interaction in which the core randomization step relies on Bernoulli trials or mixtures involving Bernoulli and geometric distributions. These mechanisms play a critical role in both the theoretical understanding and practical instantiation of optimal differentially private mechanisms for both single-query and streaming settings, as well as in the design of locally-private protocols where binary randomized responses are required. In the canonical instantiation, Bernoulli-based mechanisms underpin the implementation of staircase-shaped optimal noise distributions, empirically optimal integer-valued noise for counts, thresholding operations in partition selection, and privacy amplification strategies. This article provides a comprehensive technical overview and characterization of Bernoulli-based differentially private mechanisms, their design, mathematical properties, and application scopes.

1. Staircase and Geometric Mixture Mechanisms

The optimal $\epsilon$-differentially private mechanism for a single real-valued query under cost-minimization admits a noise distribution that is staircase-shaped, i.e., a piecewise constant, symmetric, monotonically decreasing probability density function that decays geometrically with step size equal to the query sensitivity $\Delta$ (Geng et al., 2012). The continuous staircase noise density $f_\gamma(x)$ is defined by:

• $f_\gamma(x) = a(\gamma)$ for $x \in [0, \gamma\Delta)$,
• $f_\gamma(x) = e^{-\epsilon}a(\gamma)$ for $x \in [\gamma\Delta, \Delta)$,
• $f_\gamma(x) = e^{-k\epsilon}f_\gamma(x-k\Delta)$ for $x \in [k\Delta, (k+1)\Delta)$, $k \in \mathbb{N}$, with $f_\gamma(-x) = f_\gamma(x)$ enforcing symmetry.

The normalization constant is $$a(\gamma) = \frac{1 - e^{-\epsilon}}{2(\gamma + e^{-\epsilon}(1-\gamma))}$$.

Algorithmically, this distribution is generated as a geometric mixture of uniform distributions: sample a sign (Bernoulli trial, $1/2$ each side), select a step $k$ according to the geometric distribution (parameter $e^{-\epsilon}$), then sample uniformly on either $[0, \gamma\Delta)$ or $[\gamma\Delta, \Delta)$. The discrete version generalizes the geometric mechanism for count queries (discrete Laplace), with noise probability mass function $p(z) \propto e^{-\epsilon |z|/\Delta}$ for integer $z$ (Geng et al., 2012).

2. Utility Optimization Framework and Optimality Proofs

The selection of Bernoulli-based staircase mechanisms is mathematically characterized under a general utility-maximization (cost-minimization) objective, where designers solve: $$\min_\mu \int L(x)\,d\mu(x) \text{ s.t. } \mu(S) \leq e^{\epsilon}\mu(S+d)\ \forall S, |d|\le \Delta$$ for cost functions $L(x)$ such as $|x|$ (noise amplitude) or $x^2$ (noise power). Under this formulation, the staircase mechanism (parameterized by $\gamma \in [0,1]$) attains the infimum, and the optimal noise is shown to be query-output-independent and symmetric (Geng et al., 2012). The derivation proceeds by symmetrization and by demonstrating that, under mild regularity, the optimal noise must be piecewise constant with exponentially decaying mass across "steps," implementable via Bernoulli and geometric draws.

In the integer-valued (count query) setting, this gives rise to a noise distribution with mass function exhibiting a geometric staircase profile. For sensitivity $\Delta = 1$, the optimum reduces exactly to the two-sided geometric mechanism—the canonical Bernoulli-derived mechanism for discrete outcomes.

3. Performance, Trade-offs, and Regime Analysis

For monotone loss functions, the optimal staircase mechanism achieves substantially lower expected noise amplitude and power than the Laplacian in low privacy (large $\epsilon$) regimes, whereas the Laplace mechanism is asymptotically optimal as $\epsilon \to 0$. Explicitly, with $L(x) = |x|$, the optimal cost scales as $\Theta(\Delta e^{-\epsilon / 2})$ while Laplacian scales as $\Delta / \epsilon$; for $L(x) = x^2$, minima are $\Theta(\Delta^2 e^{-2\epsilon/3})$ and $2\Delta^2/\epsilon^2$ respectively. For small $\epsilon$, the staircase mechanism's advantage diminishes and Laplace noise suffices (Geng et al., 2012).

For count queries with bounded integer-valued outputs, Bernoulli-mixed error mechanisms—where the true count is reported with probability $\eta$ (Bernoulli trial, $P(Y=n)=\eta$) and symmetric errors with probability $1-\eta$—enable explicit privacy-utility parameterization (Sadeghi et al., 2020). The designer can then minimize the differential privacy parameter $\delta$ (for given $\epsilon$) or optimize $\epsilon$ for a fixed mistake rate, enabling interpretable control over privacy risk and accuracy.

4. Bernoulli Mechanisms in Partition Selection and Thresholding

In differentially private partition selection for group-by queries, thresholding decisions are theoretically and practically encoded as Bernoulli draws determined by the count and an optimal release probability $\pi(n)$ (Desfontaines et al., 2020). The function $\pi(n)$ is constructed recursively to satisfy $\epsilon$-$\delta$-DP conditions, with explicit closed forms for certain count ranges: $$\pi(n) = \frac{e^{n\epsilon} - 1}{e^\epsilon - 1}\delta$$ for $n$ below a threshold, then saturating to $1$ for large $n$. A key insight is equivalence with noisy thresholding: a partition is released if $n + X \ge k+1$, with $X$ drawn from a symmetric, truncated geometric distribution. This noise is generated by a Bernoulli trial (sign) mixed with geometric draws (step size), constituting a canonical Bernoulli-based DP mechanism for structured selection tasks.

5. Bernoulli Sampling for Privacy Amplification

Bernoulli sampling, where only random samples of the output (or parameters) of a DP algorithm are released, provides privacy amplification. For a mechanism outputting $\theta$ in $[0,1]^d$, post-processing via $k$ i.i.d. Bernoulli samples of each coordinate with parameter $\theta_j$ gives strictly stronger privacy: the Rényi divergence and amplified DP parameter is upper-bounded by $\min\{\epsilon, d k r_\alpha(c)\}$, with $r_\alpha(p)$ defined as the order-$\alpha$ Rényi divergence for Bernoulli parameters $p$ and $1-p$ (Imola et al., 2021). This analysis formally quantifies the privacy gain relative to input $\epsilon$-DP, particularly useful in Bayesian inference releases or neural network weight sparsification, provided the output is appropriately quantized.

Amplification by Bernoulli sampling is distinct from input subsampling or shuffling, operating as post-processing on already-private outputs and leveraging coordinate-wise independence. Exact calculation of the amplification factor is computationally expensive, but closed-form bounds are often tight for practical parameter ranges.

6. Applications and Implementations

Bernoulli-based DP mechanisms are applied in several domains:

• Locally DP Thresholded Bandits: The PrivBern($\epsilon$) mechanism takes a value $r\in[0,1]$ and outputs a Bernoulli random variable with $$P[B(r) = 1] = (r e^\epsilon + 1 - r)/(1 + e^\epsilon)$$. This provides $\epsilon$-local DP and transforms mean reward $\mu_a$ to a privatized mean $\mu_{a,\epsilon}$. The resulting privacy-adjusted bandit algorithms exhibit regret and error bounds scaling as $((e^\epsilon + 1)/(e^\epsilon - 1))^2$ times the non-private complexity measure, with matching lower and upper bounds up to poly-log factors (Barbara et al., 30 Jul 2025).
• Count Queries in Census/Official Statistics: Integer-valued DP mechanisms report the true count with probability $\eta$ and distribute mass symmetrically to nearby integers on a bounded support, enabling control over both error rate and privacy parameters (Sadeghi et al., 2020).
• Continuous Statistics: The staircase (Bernoulli/geometric mixed) mechanism achieves the optimal trade-off for real-valued responses and is easier to simulate and implement efficiently than Laplace for sensitive utility targets (Geng et al., 2012).
• Partition/Group-by Queries: Release decisions are driven by Bernoulli draws with probability functions constructed to tightly satisfy privacy constraints, yielding optimal utility (Desfontaines et al., 2020).

Table: Core Bernoulli-Based Mechanisms

Mechanism	Output Type	Noise Distribution
PrivBern($\epsilon$) (Barbara et al., 30 Jul 2025)	Binary	$$\operatorname{Bern}((r e^\epsilon + 1 - r)/(1+e^\epsilon))$$
Staircase (Geng et al., 2012)	Real/discrete	Geometric-mixed uniform
Geometric Mechanism	Integer	$p(z) \propto e^{-\epsilon |z|/\Delta}$
Bernoulli-mixed Count (Sadeghi et al., 2020)	Integer	$P(Y=n)=\eta$, $P(Y=n\pm i)=\bar{\eta}\alpha_i/2$
DP Partition Selection (Desfontaines et al., 2020)	Bernoulli (keep/drop)	$\pi(n)$, thresholded geometric

7. Implementation Remarks and Limitations

The generation of staircase and geometric mechanisms is computationally tractable: a Bernoulli trial selects sign, a geometric variable selects the step, and uniform draws fill the interval. The main trade-off is in parameter selection—larger $\epsilon$ gives higher utility but weaker privacy (fewer steps, higher probability of large perturbation). For discrete/histogram/count settings, controlling the support and "honest-report" probability $\eta$ provides a transparent privacy-utility knob.

Bernoulli-based post-processing for privacy amplification is especially effective in distributed or decentralized settings where local DP is prerequisite. However, the tightest privacy amplification is only achieved for specific parameter regimes, and computational cost can scale with output dimension or number of samples. In settings where output distribution support is bounded, attention must be paid to rare distinguishing events that may break theoretical privacy bounds (handled via careful mass allocation and, in bounded additive mechanisms, by extended privacy accountants (Sommer et al., 2021)).

---

Bernoulli-based differentially private mechanisms constitute both the algorithmic core and analytical backbone for a wide range of optimal DP designs, providing explicit, computationally efficient, and theoretically justified ways to achieve and calibrate privacy-utility tradeoffs across query types, privacy regimes, and application domains. Their connection to staircase noise, thresholding, and privacy amplification underlies their ubiquity in both centralized and locally private data analysis.