mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Towards Lifecycle Unlearning Commitment Management: Measuring Sample-level Approximate Unlearning Completeness

arXiv 2403.12830 ↗First posted 19 Mar 2024cs.LG cs.CRcited by 6

On the map: LLM safety and security → Machine unlearning

Abstract (arXiv)

By adopting a more flexible definition of unlearning and adjusting the model distribution to simulate training without the targeted data, approximate machine unlearning provides a less resource-demanding alternative to the more laborious exact unlearning methods. Yet, the unlearning completeness of target samples-even when the approximate algorithms are executed faithfully without external threats-remains largely unexamined, raising questions about those approximate algorithms' ability to fulfill their commitment of unlearning during the lifecycle. In this paper, we introduce the task of Lifecycle Unlearning Commitment Management (LUCM) for approximate unlearning and outline its primary challenges. We propose an efficient metric designed to assess the sample-level unlearning completeness. Our empirical results demonstrate its superiority over membership inference techniques in two key areas: the strong correlation of its measurements with unlearning completeness across various unlearning tasks, and its computational efficiency, making it suitable for real-time applications. Additionally, we show that this metric is able to serve as a tool for monitoring unlearning anomalies throughout the unlearning lifecycle, including both under-unlearning and over-unlearning. We apply this metric to evaluate the unlearning commitments of current approximate algorithms. Our analysis, conducted across multiple unlearning benchmarks, reveals that these algorithms inconsistently fulfill their unlearning commitments due to two main issues: 1) unlearning new data can significantly affect the unlearning utility of previously requested data, and 2) approximate algorithms fail to ensure equitable unlearning utility across different groups. These insights emphasize the crucial importance of LUCM throughout the unlearning lifecycle. We will soon open-source our newly developed benchmark.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Machine unlearning, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 28 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Mar 2024.

Builds on

28 of 44 references.

Closest ancestors · 12

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2023A Duty to Forget, a Right to be Assured? Exposing Vulnerabilities in Machine Unlearning Services15 Sep
  2. 2023Fast Machine Unlearning Without Retraining Through Selective Synaptic Dampening15 Aug
  3. 2023Model Sparsity Can Simplify Machine Unlearning11 Apr
  4. 2023Boundary Unlearning21 Mar
  5. 2022Forget Unlearning: Towards True Data-Deletion in Machine Learning17 Oct
  6. 2022Evaluating Machine Unlearning via Epistemic Uncertainty23 Aug
  7. 2022Deep Unlearning via Randomized Conditionally Independent Hessians15 Apr
  8. 2021Fast Yet Effective Machine Unlearning17 Nov
  9. 2021On the Necessity of Auditable Algorithmic Definitions for Machine Unlearning22 Oct
  10. 2021Unrolling SGD: Understanding Factors Influencing Machine Unlearning27 Sep
  11. 2021Adaptive Machine Unlearning8 Jun
  12. 2021Machine Unlearning via Algorithmic Stability25 Feb

Other references · 16

  1. 2019Machine Unlearningcited by 1,061
  2. 2021Membership Inference Attacks From First Principlescited by 878
  3. 2022Quantifying Memorization Across Neural Language Modelscited by 763
  4. 2019Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Net: Selective Forgetting in Deep Networkscited by 618
  5. 2019Certified Data Removal from Machine Learning Modelscited by 535
  6. 2020Amnesiac Machine Learningcited by 319
  7. 2020Approximate Data Deletion from Machine Learning Modelscited by 255
  8. 2020Influence Functions in Deep Learning Are Fragilecited by 252
  9. 2022What Does it Mean for a Language Model to Preserve Privacy?cited by 195
  10. 2020Forgetting Outside the Box: Scrubbing Deep Networks of Information Accessible from Input-Output Observationscited by 180
  11. 2020Mixed-Privacy Forgetting in Deep Networkscited by 163
  12. 2022The Privacy Onion Effect: Memorization is Relativecited by 136
4 more
  1. 2021Proof-of-Learning: Definitions and Practicecited by 84
  2. 2020Learn to Forget: Machine Unlearning via Neuron Maskingcited by 62
  3. 2020Have you forgotten? A method to assess if machine learning models have forgotten datacited by 17
  4. 2021EMA: Auditing Data Removal from Trained Modelscited by 8

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

6 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Towards Lifecycle Unlearning Commitment Management: Measuring Sample-level Unlearning Completeness
  2. 2025When to Forget? Complexity Trade-offs in Machine Unlearning
  3. 2025Efficient Machine Unlearning by Model Splitting and Core Sample Selection
  4. 2024Instance-Level Difficulty: A Missing Perspective in Machine Unlearning
  5. 2026The BatchNorm Illusion: Diagnosing Normalization Artifacts in Machine Unlearning Evaluation
  6. 2024Are we making progress in unlearning? Findings from the first NeurIPS unlearning competition
  7. 2026DUET: Distilled LLM Unlearning from an Efficiently Contextualized Teacher
  8. 2025On the Impossibility of Retrain Equivalence in Machine Unlearning