Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 cited by

Catastrophic Failure of LLM Unlearning via Quantization

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 2410.16454 v3 pith:WH7HOOIY submitted 2024-10-21 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords unlearningllmsquantizationknowledgemethodsbeencontentcurrent
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable proficiency in generating text, benefiting from extensive training on vast textual corpora. However, LLMs may also acquire unwanted behaviors from the diverse and sensitive nature of their training data, which can include copyrighted and private content. Machine unlearning has been introduced as a viable solution to remove the influence of such problematic content without the need for costly and time-consuming retraining. This process aims to erase specific knowledge from LLMs while preserving as much model utility as possible. Despite the effectiveness of current unlearning methods, little attention has been given to whether existing unlearning methods for LLMs truly achieve forgetting or merely hide the knowledge, which current unlearning benchmarks fail to detect. This paper reveals that applying quantization to models that have undergone unlearning can restore the "forgotten" information. To thoroughly evaluate this phenomenon, we conduct comprehensive experiments using various quantization techniques across multiple precision levels. We find that for unlearning methods with utility constraints, the unlearned model retains an average of 21\% of the intended forgotten knowledge in full precision, which significantly increases to 83\% after 4-bit quantization. ... Our code is available at: \href{https://github.com/zzwjames/FailureLLMUnlearning}{https://github.com/zzwjames/FailureLLMUnlearning}.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

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

  1. Bits and Memories: Measuring Verbatim Extraction Across LLM Quantization

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Quantizing LLMs selectively forgets memorized text faster than capability, but 1B-scale 4-bit models still extract ~72% of memorized sequences, so quantization is not a privacy defense.

  2. One Modality to Forget Them All: Enhancing Cross-Modal Unlearning in Vision-Language Models

    cs.CV 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    Cross-modal unlearning transfer in vision-language models is asymmetric, architecture-dependent, and shallow under typographic attacks; influence-guided block selection reduces the measured gap.

  3. Towards Evaluation for Real-World LLM Unlearning

    cs.AI 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    DCUE evaluates LLM unlearning by comparing core-token confidence score distributions of the unlearned model and the original model, corrected by a validation set, using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test.

  4. Capturing the Effects of Quantization on Trojans in Code LLMs

    cs.SE 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    At 4-bit inference quantization, CodeLlama-7b generates more accurate SQL and activates a planted backdoor far less often, while Llama-2-7b is hardly affected, across two training seeds.

  5. Module-Aware Parameter-Efficient Machine Unlearning on Transformers

    cs.LG 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    MAPE-Unlearn uses Fisher-information-based scores and greedy search to select important heads and filters, then applies sparse unlearning updates, claiming improved efficacy-fidelity trade-offs on Transformers.

  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.

Pith tools