Pith. sign in

REVIEW 9 cited by

Mechanistic Unlearning: Robust Knowledge Unlearning and Editing via Mechanistic Localization

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2410.12949 v2 pith:C64P3BJP submitted 2024-10-16 cs.LG cs.CL

classification cs.LGcs.CL
keywords unlearningcomponentsknowledgeeditingeditsmechanisticmethodsmodel
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Methods for knowledge editing and unlearning in large language models seek to edit or remove undesirable knowledge or capabilities without compromising general language modeling performance. This work investigates how mechanistic interpretability -- which, in part, aims to identify model components (circuits) associated to specific interpretable mechanisms that make up a model capability -- can improve the precision and effectiveness of editing and unlearning. We find a stark difference in unlearning and edit robustness when training components localized by different methods. We highlight an important distinction between methods that localize components based primarily on preserving outputs, and those finding high level mechanisms with predictable intermediate states. In particular, localizing edits/unlearning to components associated with the lookup-table mechanism for factual recall 1) leads to more robust edits/unlearning across different input/output formats, and 2) resists attempts to relearn the unwanted information, while also reducing unintended side effects compared to baselines, on both a sports facts dataset and the CounterFact dataset across multiple models. We also find that certain localized edits disrupt the latent knowledge in the model more than any other baselines, making unlearning more robust to various attacks.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 9 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Measure, Don't Optimize: Forecasting Recovery in LLM Unlearning

    cs.CL 2026-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A Jacobian-lens audit predicts model-level relearning recovery in LLM unlearning but cannot pick which facts return and backfires when used as a training penalty.

  2. RippleBench: Capturing Ripple Effects Using Existing Knowledge Repositories

    cs.AI 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    RippleBench automatically generates questions at increasing semantic distance from unlearned topics and shows all eight tested unlearning methods degrade accuracy that recovers only slowly with distance.

  3. Learning-Time Encoding Shapes Unlearning in LLMs

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    How knowledge is encoded during LLM fine-tuning strongly affects later unlearning: paraphrased training data helps unlearning, while entangled chunks hinder selective forgetting.

  4. DUSK: Do Not Unlearn Shared Knowledge

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    DUSK benchmarks machine unlearning under overlapping forget and retain documents, showing existing methods remove surface text but fail to preserve shared knowledge while erasing unique content.

  5. SAeUron: Interpretable Concept Unlearning in Diffusion Models with Sparse Autoencoders

    cs.LG 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    SAeUron removes concepts from text-to-image diffusion models by ablating concept-specific sparse autoencoder features during inference, achieving state-of-the-art unlearning on UnlearnCanvas and I2P without weight updates.

  6. SoK: Machine Unlearning for Large Language Models

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A new taxonomy for LLM unlearning distinguishes removal-intended from suppression-intended methods, and argues that gradient ascent methods functionally behave like suppression.

  7. Editing as Unlearning: Are Knowledge Editing Methods Strong Baselines for Large Language Model Unlearning?

    cs.LG 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    WISE and AlphaEdit, two knowledge editing methods, are competitive unlearning baselines when unlearning is framed as editing a model's answer into a refusal.

  8. Step-by-Step Reasoning Attack: Revealing 'Erased' Knowledge in Large Language Models

    cs.CR 2025-06 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    Step-by-step reasoning prompts can recover purportedly erased facts from unlearned LLMs, but the paper's quantitative evidence is internally inconsistent.

  9. Open Problems in Machine Unlearning for AI Safety

    cs.LG 2025-01 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Machine unlearning is not a comprehensive solution for AI safety; it is best suited to data removal, while capability control faces fundamental and unresolved challenges.

Pith tools