arXiv:2409. 02228v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: When language models (LMs) are trained to forget (or "unlearn'') a skill, how precisely does their behavior change?
arXiv:2606. 06320v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Machine unlearning aims to remove targeted knowledge from a trained model while preserving its general capabilities.
arXiv:2601.21702v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We consider Representation Misdirection (RM), a class of large language model (LLM) unlearning methods that achieve forgetting by redirecting the l...
arXiv:2510. 18874v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Adapting language models (LMs) to new tasks via post-training carries the risk of degrading existing capabilities -- a phenomenon classically known as catastrophic forgetting.
arXiv:2606. 25001v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Machine unlearning (MU) is commonly judged by output forgetting, such as low forget-set accuracy or reduced logit-level membership inference.
The paper explores ways to reduce the memorization of training data in language models, testing three regularizer-based, three finetuning-based, and eleven machine unlearning methods—five of which are newly introduced. It introduces TinyMem, a lightweight suite of small models for rapid testing of these mitigation techniques, and shows that unlearning methods, particularly BalancedSubnet, outperform others in removing memorized content while maintaining task performance. The study also finds that regularizer-based approaches are slow and ineffective, while finetuning methods are costly, especially when high accuracy is required.
The paper introduces LRE (Learned Relevance Eviction), a lightweight, CPU‑only, language‑model‑free scorer that learns which parts of an agent’s interaction history are task‑critical and preserves them verbatim. In experiments, LRE matches or surpasses baseline eviction policies on accuracy‑cost trade‑offs, recovers 93% of full‑history accuracy, reduces worst‑case prompt size by 52%, and outperforms dense and token‑pruning encoders in conversational memory while being 295–1569× smaller. The method also achieves superior budgeted answer quality on LoCoMo reading and can be trained annotation‑free, recovering 95% of supervised scorer performance.
arXiv:2607. 09236v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Machine unlearning in LLMs is the targeted removal of specific knowledge while preserving all other capabilities, critical for privacy and safety.
arXiv:2609.37076v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models trained on vast corpora inherently risk memorizing harmful content that may later re-emerge in their outputs. To mitigate this is...
arXiv:2609.36612v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Unlearning in large language models (LLMs) is typically evaluated at the output level, where a model appears to suppress sensitive or undesirable conte...
arXiv:2607. 29503v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While neural networks are typically evaluated by their training and test performance, these metrics do not reveal how robust a learned representation is.
arXiv:2511. 04666v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: A fundamental challenge in developing general learning algorithms is their tendency to forget past knowledge as they adapt to new data.
The study trains ten open‑weight large language models (LLMs) to predict their own accuracy on factual multiple‑choice questions before answering. Results show that the models’ confidence signals split into two distinct patterns: early in training, confidence aligns with output consistency (how concentrated the answer distribution is), while later, it aligns with true accuracy but only on data similar to the training set. This indicates that calibration training may not universally teach LLMs to detect their own errors.