A new taxonomy for LLM unlearning distinguishes removal-intended from suppression-intended methods, and argues that gradient ascent methods functionally behave like suppression.
Textual Unlearning Gives a False Sense of Unlearning
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
Language Models (LMs) are prone to ''memorizing'' training data, including substantial sensitive user information. To mitigate privacy risks and safeguard the right to be forgotten, machine unlearning has emerged as a promising approach for enabling LMs to efficiently ''forget'' specific texts. However, despite the good intentions, is textual unlearning really as effective and reliable as expected? To address the concern, we first propose Unlearning Likelihood Ratio Attack+ (U-LiRA+), a rigorous textual unlearning auditing method, and find that unlearned texts can still be detected with very high confidence after unlearning. Further, we conduct an in-depth investigation on the privacy risks of textual unlearning mechanisms in deployment and present the Textual Unlearning Leakage Attack (TULA), along with its variants in both black- and white-box scenarios. We show that textual unlearning mechanisms could instead reveal more about the unlearned texts, exposing them to significant membership inference and data reconstruction risks. Our findings highlight that existing textual unlearning actually gives a false sense of unlearning, underscoring the need for more robust and secure unlearning mechanisms.
citation-role summary
citation-polarity summary
fields
cs.LG 1years
2025 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1roles
background 1polarities
unclear 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
SoK: Machine Unlearning for Large Language Models
A new taxonomy for LLM unlearning distinguishes removal-intended from suppression-intended methods, and argues that gradient ascent methods functionally behave like suppression.