Imagine you're a sound engineer running a mixing board. Each fader controls the volume of one instrument track. Turn any fader down and that instrument gets quieter — but here's the catch: every time you lower one fader, it also slightly dampens the bleed from neighboring microphones, changing the perceived interaction between instruments. This paper gives you the exact equation that tells you, for any combination of fader positions, precisely how much each instrument's solo volume AND every cross-instrument interaction will be attenuated. The mixing board is the differential privacy budget; the instruments are database attributes. The committed claim: under attribute-level randomized response with Kronecker-structured randomization matrices, any cross-moment of the anonymized distribution involving k distinct attributes equals the true cross-moment multiplied by a product of per-attribute attenuation factors, each determined solely by that attribute's share of the total privacy budget. This isn't an approximation — it's exact, derived from first principles of the proposed randomization structure. Where does this sit on the ladder? The DP literature has long known that randomized response attenuates marginal statistics. The contribution here is extending the attenuation characterization from marginals to arbitrary-order cross-moments, showing the multiplicative decomposition is exact under the Kronecker structure. Prior work — Warner (1965) for single attributes, Kairouz et al. (2016) for optimal local DP mechanisms, RAPPOR (Erlingsson et al. 2014) for frequency estimation — established the machinery but did not provide a closed-form multivariate cross-moment attenuation formula with explicit budget-allocation controls. The paper doesn't claim to beat a SOTA benchmark in a competitive sense; it fills a theoretical gap. Architecturally, this lives in the local differential privacy family, specifically randomized response mechanisms. The key structural choice is formulating the joint randomization matrix as a Kronecker product of per-attribute matrices, which is what makes the attenuation decompose cleanly into a product of per-attribute factors. This is a pen-and-paper result — no neural networks, no optimization loops, no hardware dependency. The compute property it leans on is algebraic: Kronecker structure is what makes the math tractable. Integrity is interesting here because the validation regime is mathematical proof, not experiment. The attenuation formula is derived, not estimated. The numerical illustration is simple and meant to be pedagogical — two different budget allocations across attributes producing different covariance preservation profiles under the same total epsilon. There's no cherry-picking risk in the usual empirical sense, but the practical question is whether the Kronecker-product assumption holds in realistic deployment scenarios where attributes may have complex dependencies or where the randomization mechanism might not factor so cleanly. The key milestone insight is that the attenuation of a k-th order cross-moment scales as the product of k attenuation factors, each less than 1. This means higher-order interactions get hammered exponentially — a 4-way interaction is attenuated by the product of four terms, each potentially well below 1. The practical frontier is: how many attributes can you include in a cross-moment before the signal is buried in noise? The paper makes this tradeoff explicit and quantifiable for the first time. The obvious experiment not run: applying this framework to a real-world dataset with ground-truth correlations and measuring whether the predicted attenuation actually matches empirical attenuation under finite-sample randomized response. The paper stays in the exact-math regime. My read: this is a theory paper that deliberately stays clean, and the empirical validation is being saved for follow-up or left as an invitation to the community. The framework is also restricted to randomized response — extending to Gaussian or Laplace mechanisms would require different math entirely.
