Quantization-Aware Optimization for Cryptographic Neural Network Inference

Authors

  • Mariah Stuart School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA. Author

Keywords:

cryptographic inference, quantization, private machine learning, secure multiparty computation, homomorphic encryption, systems optimization, fairness, governance, sustainability

Abstract

Cryptographic neural network inference seeks to preserve the confidentiality of inputs, models, and outputs while still allowing useful predictions to be computed across trust boundaries. The practical difficulty is that secure computation protocols impose substantial communication, memory, and latency costs, especially when neural networks contain nonlinear activation functions and high-precision parameters. Quantization-aware optimization has emerged as a critical systems strategy because it changes both the arithmetic intensity and the protocol structure of private inference. This paper examines quantization-aware optimization as a socio-technical architecture problem rather than a narrow numerical compression technique. It analyzes how reduced precision interacts with secure multiparty computation, homomorphic encryption, trusted execution, and hybrid deployment models. The discussion emphasizes structural trade-offs among accuracy, privacy, latency, energy use, robustness, fairness, and governance. It argues that quantization can reduce cryptographic overhead by simplifying nonlinear operations, lowering communication volume, and enabling integer-arithmetic execution, yet it can also introduce approximation vulnerabilities, distributional bias, and auditing difficulties. The paper considers infrastructure implications for cloud, edge, and regulated environments, as well as lifecycle sustainability concerns. It concludes that quantization-aware cryptographic inference requires co-design across machine learning, cryptography, hardware, policy, and organizational governance. Without integrated evaluation, optimization may improve benchmark performance while weakening accountability, equity, and long-term maintainability.

References

1. Dwork, C. (2006). Differential privacy. In Automata, Languages and Programming (pp. 1-12). Springer.

2. Rivest, R. L., Adleman, L., & Dertouzos, M. L. (1978). On data banks and privacy homomorphisms. Foundations of Secure Computation, 4(11), 169-180.

3. Yao, A. C. (1982). Protocols for secure computations. In 23rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (pp. 160-164). IEEE.

4. Goldreich, O., Micali, S., & Wigderson, A. (1987). How to play any mental game. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (pp. 218-229). ACM.

5. Gentry, C. (2009). Fully homomorphic encryption using ideal lattices. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (pp. 169-178). ACM.

6. Juvekar, C., Vaikuntanathan, V., & Chandrakasan, A. (2018). GAZELLE: A low latency framework for secure neural network inference. In 27th USENIX Security Symposium (pp. 1651-1669). USENIX.

7. Liu, J., Juuti, M., Lu, Y., & Asokan, N. (2017). Oblivious neural network predictions via MiniONN transformations. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (pp. 619-631). ACM.

8. Mohassel, P., & Zhang, Y. (2017). SecureML: A system for scalable privacy-preserving machine learning. In 2017 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (pp. 19-38). IEEE.

9. Riazi, M. S., Weinert, C., Tkachenko, O., Songhori, E. M., Schneider, T., & Koushanfar, F. (2018). Chameleon: A hybrid secure computation framework for machine learning applications. In Proceedings of the 2018 on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security (pp. 707-721). ACM.

10. Mishra, P., Lehmkuhl, R., Srinivasan, A., Zheng, W., & Popa, R. A. (2020). Delphi: A cryptographic inference service for neural networks. In 29th USENIX Security Symposium (pp. 2505-2522). USENIX.

11. Knott, B., Venkataraman, S., Hannun, A., Sengupta, S., Ibrahim, M., & van der Maaten, L. (2021). CrypTen: Secure multi-party computation meets machine learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 34.

12. Peng, H., Zhou, S., Luo, Y., Xu, N., Duan, S., Ran, R., ... & Ding, C. (2023). Rrnet: Towards relu-reduced neural network for two-party computation based private inference. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.02292.

13. Han, S., Mao, H., & Dally, W. J. (2016). Deep compression: Compressing deep neural networks with pruning, trained quantization and Huffman coding. In International Conference on Learning Representations.

14. Jacob, B., Kligys, S., Chen, B., Zhu, M., Tang, M., Howard, A., Adam, H., & Kalenichenko, D. (2018). Quantization and training of neural networks for efficient integer-arithmetic-only inference. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (pp. 2704-2713). IEEE.

15. Courbariaux, M., Hubara, I., Soudry, D., El-Yaniv, R., & Bengio, Y. (2016). Binarized neural networks: Training deep neural networks with weights and activations constrained to +1 or -1. arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.02830.

16. Sze, V., Chen, Y. H., Yang, T. J., & Emer, J. S. (2017). Efficient processing of deep neural networks: A tutorial and survey. Proceedings of the IEEE, 105(12), 2295-2329.

17. Kilbertus, N., Rojas Carulla, M., Parascandolo, G., Hardt, M., Janzing, D., & Schölkopf, B. (2017). Avoiding discrimination through causal reasoning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30.

18. Hardt, M., Price, E., & Srebro, N. (2016). Equality of opportunity in supervised learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 29.

19. Papernot, N., McDaniel, P., Sinha, A., & Wellman, M. P. (2018). SoK: Security and privacy in machine learning. In 2018 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (pp. 399-414). IEEE.

20. Barocas, S., Hardt, M., & Narayanan, A. (2019). Fairness and machine learning: Limitations and opportunities. https://fairmlbook.org

Downloads

Published

2026-08-28