arXiv:2606. 24998v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Language models are running out of high-quality training data, and even aggressively deduplicated corpora retain some amount of repetition.
arXiv:2609.00378v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models pay a well-documented tax on non-English text: the same content costs several times more tokens, and because attention is quadrat...
arXiv:2610.09835v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Continual pre-training and fine-tuning in Large Language Models (LLMs) inevitably induce catastrophic forgetting, typically mitigated by replay using o...
arXiv:2605. 07482v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Machine unlearning for large language models (LLMs) aims to selectively remove memorized content such as private data, copyrighted text, or hazardous knowledge, without costly full retraining.
arXiv:2607. 12649v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent work on extractable memorization in LLMs suffers from two contrasting validity problems.
The paper investigates how much a masked‑text reconstruction predictor’s outputs would differ if a second corpus were collected from the same population. Using a smoothed predictor based on token‑pair counts, the authors derive a first‑order formula for expected disagreement between predictors trained on two independent corpora, accounting for document length, random context counts, and token‑offset correlations. Experiments on TinyStories, WikiText‑103, and CNN/DailyMail show that increasing corpus size from 512 to 2,048 chunks of 64 tokens reduces disagreement only modestly (5–40 %), and that forecast accuracy improves with larger reference corpora and a source‑split jackknife correction. whyItMatters:"The study provides a practical method to estimate how much predictor outputs would change with additional data, informing decisions about data collection and model robustness in masked‑text reconstruction tasks."
The paper investigates whether a language model’s forgetting—worsening performance on standard web text after fine‑tuning or further pretraining—can be mitigated by simple, fixed adjustments to its final token predictions. By fitting a vocabulary‑wide bias (a token‑specific bonus or penalty) and optionally a temperature scaling, the authors evaluate recovery across 14 base‑to‑derived model pairs ranging from 1B to 7B parameters. Results show modest gains: up to 10% recovery with bias alone and up to 36% when combined with temperature, though models further pretrained on math lose the most and recover little; even in a controlled simulation with random damage, the bias‑plus‑temperature fix recovers 29%.
arXiv:2607. 17545v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Language agents depend on memory across interactions.
arXiv:2606. 02920v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Language-model unlearning updates a trained model to behave as if it had not seen selected training examples, while preserving utility and avoiding costly retraining.
arXiv:2609.40295v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Web text makes up the majority of pretraining data and is increasingly AI-generated. After applying FineWeb quality filtering, we find that 27.5% of to...
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.
arXiv:2506. 15138v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Tokenization directly affects the inference efficiency of large language models, since fragmented tokenization increases sequence length and generation cost.