arXiv:2606. 15903v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Where an LLM sits in an agent memory pipeline -- between the recall plane that retrieves stored facts (extensively benchmarked) and the control plane that mutates them via supersede, release, purge (largely untested) -- shapes which forgetting failure modes the system recovers.
By Dongxu Yang
arXiv:2607.27836v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Large language model unlearning is consistently fragile under relearn attacks. On TOFU, fine-tuning on twenty forget examples substantially recover...
By Xiangyu Yin, Jiaxu Liu, Zhen Chen, Chih-Hong Cheng
arXiv:2601. 18699v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Sequential fine-tuning of Large Language Models (LLMs) adaptation to target tasks often triggers catastrophic forgetting, where the acquisition of novel target skills degrades ancestral capabilities.
By Gustav Olaf Yunus Laitinen-Fredriksson Lundstrom-Imanov
arXiv:2606. 20502v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Whether LLMs scoring well on vulnerability benchmarks genuinely reason about security or merely pattern-match on contaminated data remains unresolved.
By Arastoo Zibaeirad, Marco Vieira
arXiv:2608.21606v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Machine unlearning aims to remove the influence of targeted training data from a model while preserving its remaining capabilities, but evaluating whet...
By Ayush Gupta, Hima Varshini Surisetty, Sreevidya Bollineni, Varad Ingale, Tuhina Tripathi, Abhishek Lalwani, Somya Chatterjee, Sadid Hasan
arXiv:2608.20873v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Every way of teaching a deployed language model something new -- full fine-tuning, adapter merging, model editing -- replaces the released checkpoint,...
By Zifeng Liu, Zhiyong Du, Yaxin Lu, Yiming Mao, Zhenhe Wang, Wenqi Shi, Zhengkun Jing
arXiv:2607. 02513v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLMs memorize sensitive training data, including personally identifiable information (PII), creating a pressing need for reliable post hoc removal methods.
By Matteo Boglioni, Thibault Rousset, Siva Reddy, Marius Mosbach, Verna Dankers
arXiv:2609.16229v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Machine unlearning aims to remove specific knowledge from a trained large language model (LLM) without retraining from scratch. Existing methods modify...
By Pingzhi Li, Jinhao Duan, Vaishnav Tadiparthi, Nakul Agarwal, Kwonjoon Lee, Ehsan Moradi Pari, Hossein Nourkhiz Mahjoub, Sijia Liu, Tianlong Chen
arXiv:2512. 14751v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Finetuning pretrained large language models (LLMs) has become the standard paradigm for developing downstream applications.
By Yixin Tan, Zhe Yu, Rui Wen, Jun Sakuma
arXiv:2607. 06503v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents solving multi-step tasks frequently commit to trajectories that are doomed to fail, yet continue to consume substantial inference compute before the failure becomes observable.
By Kai Ruan, Zihe Huang, Ziqi Zhou, Qianshan Wei, Xuan Wang, Hao Sun
arXiv:2606. 00738v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Adversarial Training (AT) is a leading defense against adversarial examples but often suffers from Catastrophic Overfitting (CO) in efficient single-step variants, where robustness to multi-step attacks collapses despite high single-step performance.
By Mazdak Teymourian, Ramtin Moslemi, Farzan Rahmani, Mohammad Hossein Rohban
The paper investigates whether a model that has undergone class unlearning can still recover forgotten classes without access to original data. It introduces a white‑box audit method that generates synthetic probes in representation space, filters them by confidence, and relabels boundary‑adjacent probes as the forgotten class. The authors define a Relearning Score to quantify recovery while preserving retain performance, and demonstrate that several unlearning techniques on CIFAR‑10, CIFAR‑100, and TinyImageNet can be fully recovered in a source‑free setting, sometimes even outperforming a retrained reference.
By Zahra Dehghani, Pablo Piantanida, Mohammadhadi Shateri