Bayesian methods lie at the heart of modern data science and provide a powerful scaffolding for estimation in data-constrained settings and principled quantification and propagation of uncertainty. Yet in many real-world use cases where these methods are deployed, there is a natural need to preserve the privacy of the individuals whose data is being scrutinized. While a number of works have attempted to approach the problem of differentially private Bayesian estimation through either reasoning about the inherent privacy of the posterior distribution or privatizing off-the-shelf Bayesian methods, these works generally do not come with rigorous utility guarantees beyond low-dimensional settings. In fact, even for the prototypical tasks of Gaussian mean estimation and linear regression, it was unknown how close one could get to the Bayes-optimal error with a private algorithm, even in the simplest case where the unknown parameter comes from a Gaussian prior. In this work, we give the first polynomial-time algorithms for both of these problems that achieve mean-squared error (1 + o(1))OPT and additionally show that both tasks exhibit an intriguing computational-statistical gap. For Bayesian mean estimation, we prove that the excess risk achieved by our method is optimal among all efficient algorithms within the low-degree framework, yet is provably worse than what is achievable by an exponential-time algorithm. For linear regression, we prove a qualitatively similar such lower bound. Our algorithms draw upon the privacy-to-robustness framework, but with the curious twist that to achieve private Bayes-optimal estimation, we need to design sum-of-squares-based robust estimators for inherently non-robust objects like the empirical mean and OLS estimator. Along the way we also add to the sum-of-squares toolkit a new kind of constraint based on short-flat decompositions.

We consider the basic statistical challenge of designing an "all-purpose" mean estimation algorithm that is recommendable across a variety of settings and models. Recent work by [Lee and Valiant 2022] introduced the first 1-d mean estimator whose error in the standard finite-variance+i.i.d. setting is optimal even in its constant factors; experimental demonstration of its good performance was shown by [Gobet et al. 2022]. Yet, unlike for classic (but not necessarily practical) estimators such as median-of-means and trimmed mean, this new algorithm lacked proven robustness guarantees in other settings, including the settings of adversarial data corruption and heavy-tailed distributions with infinite variance. Such robustness is important for practical use cases. This raises a research question: is it possible to have a mean estimator that is robust, without sacrificing provably optimal performance in the standard i.i.d. setting? In this work, we show that Lee and Valiant’s estimator is in fact an "all-purpose" mean estimator by proving: (A) It is robust to an $\eta$-fraction of data corruption, even in the strong contamination model; it has optimal estimation error $O(\sigma\sqrt{\eta})$ for distributions with variance $\sigma^2$. (B) For distributions with finite $z^\text{th}$ moment, for $z \in (1,2)$, it has optimal estimation error, matching the lower bounds of [Devroye et al. 2016] up to constants. We further show (C) that outlier robustness for 1-d mean estimators in fact implies neighborhood optimality, a notion of beyond worst-case and distribution-dependent optimality recently introduced by [Dang et al. 2023]. Previously, such an optimality guarantee was only known for median-of-means, but now it holds also for all estimators that are simultaneously robust and sub-Gaussian, including Lee and Valiant’s, resolving a question raised by Dang et al. Lastly, we show (D) the asymptotic normality and efficiency of Lee and Valiant’s estimator, as further evidence for its performance across many settings.