Krithika Ramesh

Both privacy and factual accuracy are paramount in high-stakes domains like healthcare. Concerningly, we uncover and investigate a privacy-hallucination tradeoff in differentially private (DP) language models. First, we empirically show that models pre-trained or fine-tuned with DP tend to produce more hallucinations than non-DP counterparts, with increased severity as the privacy budget grows stricter. Second, we investigate model properties driving this tradeoff, demonstrating that DP mechanisms flatten output distributions, potentially redistributing probability mass toward factually incorrect alternatives. Third, through experiments where we control fact frequency in training data, we characterize how information frequency can reduce hallucination risks in DP models. Overall, our findings underscore the need for more nuanced privacy-preserving interventions that offer rigorous privacy guarantees without compromising factual accuracy.

Text anonymization is a critical task for enabling research and development in high-stakes domains containing private data, like medicine, law, and social services. While much research has focused on redacting sensitive content from text, substantially less work has focused on what to replace redacted content with, which can enhance privacy and becomes increasingly important with greater levels of redaction. In this work, we formulate predicting replacements for sensitive spans as a research task with principled use-inspired evaluation criteria. We further propose a multi-token completion method for accomplishing this task that is designed to preserve consistency with low compute requirements, thus facilitating practitioners to anonymize data locally before sharing it externally. Human and automated annotations demonstrate that our approach produces more realistic text and better preserves utility than alternative infilling methods and differentially private mechanisms across multiple domains without retraining. Overall, our work explores the under-studied task of what to replace redacted content with and contributes grounded evaluations capturing utility, facilitating future work.

In this work, we aim to clarify and reconcile metrics for evaluating privacy protection in text through a systematic survey. Although text anonymization is essential for enabling NLP research and model development in domains with sensitive data, evaluating whether anonymization methods sufficiently protect privacy remains an open challenge. In manually reviewing 47 papers that report privacy metrics, we identify and compare six distinct privacy notions, and analyze how the associated metrics capture different aspects of privacy risk. We then assess how well these notions align with legal privacy standards (HIPAA and GDPR), as well as user-centered expectations grounded in HCI studies. Our analysis offers practical guidance on navigating the landscape of privacy evaluation approaches further and highlights gaps in current practices. Ultimately, we aim to facilitate more robust, comparable, and legally aware privacy evaluations in text anonymization.

We present SynthTextEval, a toolkit for conducting comprehensive evaluations of synthetic text. The fluency of large language model (LLM) outputs has made synthetic text potentially viable for numerous applications, such as reducing the risks of privacy violations in the development and deployment of AI systems in high-stakes domains. Realizing this potential, however, requires principled consistent evaluations of synthetic data across multiple dimensions: its utility in downstream systems, the fairness of these systems, the risk of privacy leakage, and general distributional differences from the source text. SynthTextEval allows users to conduct evaluations along all of these dimensions over synthetic data that they upload or generate using the toolkit's generation module. While our toolkit can be run over any data, we highlight its functionality and effectiveness over datasets from two high-stakes domains: healthcare and law. By consolidating and standardizing evaluation metrics, we aim to improve the viability of synthetic text, and in-turn, privacy-preservation in AI development.

The difficulty of anonymizing text data hinders the development and deployment of NLP in high-stakes domains that involve private data, such as healthcare and social services. Poorly anonymized sensitive data cannot be easily shared with annotators or external researchers, nor can it be used to train public models. In this work, we explore the feasibility of using synthetic data generated from differentially private language models in place of real data to facilitate the development of NLP in these domains without compromising privacy. In contrast to prior work, we generate synthetic data for real high-stakes domains, and we propose and conduct use-inspired evaluations to assess data quality. Our results show that prior simplistic evaluations have failed to highlight utility, privacy, and fairness issues in the synthetic data. Overall, our work underscores the need for further improvements to synthetic data generation for it to be a viable way to enable privacy-preserving data sharing.