Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Impact of Fine-Tuning Methods on Memorization in Large Language Models

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 2507.00258 v1 pith:OUWFPAW7 submitted 2025-06-30 cs.CL cs.AI

Impact of Fine-Tuning Methods on Memorization in Large Language Models

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords fine-tuningmemorizationmethodsprompt-basedimpactlanguagelargemias
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

As the capabilities of pre-trained large language models (LLMs) continue to advance, the "pre-train and fine-tune" paradigm has become increasingly mainstream, leading to the development of various fine-tuning methods. However, the privacy risks arising from memorization during fine-tuning have received relatively little attention. To address this gap, we categorize popular fine-tuning approaches and assess their impact on memorization through the lens of membership inference attacks (MIAs). Our results show that, compared to parameter-based fine-tuning, prompt-based fine-tuning achieves competitive performance while exhibiting lower vulnerability to MIAs. Furthermore, prompt-based methods maintain low memorization regardless of model scale. These findings suggest that parameter-based fine-tuning is more prone to leaking private information, whereas prompt-based fine-tuning serves as a more privacy-preserving option.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. What do Reward Models Memorize?

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    Counterfactual memorization maps show RMs misallocate capacity to easy pairs, memorize dataset artifacts, and overgeneralize length/compliance on unseen pairs.