mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

The Empirical Impact of Data Sanitization on Language Models

arXiv 2411.05978 ↗First posted 8 Nov 2024cs.CLcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Data sanitization in the context of language modeling involves identifying sensitive content, such as personally identifiable information (PII), and redacting them from a dataset corpus. It is a common practice used in natural language processing (NLP) to maintain privacy. Nevertheless, the impact of data sanitization on the language understanding capability of a language model remains less studied. This paper empirically analyzes the effects of data sanitization across several benchmark language-modeling tasks including comprehension question answering (Q&A), entailment, sentiment analysis, and text classification. Our experiments cover a wide spectrum comprising finetuning small-scale language models, to prompting large language models (LLMs), on both original and sanitized datasets, and comparing their performance across the tasks. Interestingly, our results suggest that for some tasks such as sentiment analysis or entailment, the impact of redaction is quite low, typically around 1-5%, while for tasks such as comprehension Q&A there is a big drop of >25% in performance observed in redacted queries as compared to the original. For tasks that have a higher impact, we perform a deeper dive to inspect the presence of task-critical entities. Finally, we investigate correlation between performance and number of redacted entities, and also suggest a strategy to repair an already redacted dataset by means of content-based subsampling. Additional details are available at https://sites.google.com/view/datasan.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Nov 2024.

Builds on

16 of 33 references.

References · 16

  1. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
  2. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
  3. 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,893
  4. 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,899
  5. 2022Scaling Instruction-Finetuned Language Modelscited by 3,024
  6. 2017A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inferencecited by 2,682
  7. 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,189
  8. 2018Know What You Don't Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuADcited by 1,554
  9. 2019DROP: A Reading Comprehension Benchmark Requiring Discrete Reasoning Over Paragraphscited by 903
  10. 2023Scalable Extraction of Training Data from (Production) Language Modelscited by 434
  11. 2021LexGLUE: A Benchmark Dataset for Legal Language Understanding in Englishcited by 310
  12. 2022What Does it Mean for a Language Model to Preserve Privacy?cited by 195
4 more
  1. 2016De-identification of Patient Notes with Recurrent Neural Networkscited by 88
  2. 2022Just Fine-tune Twice: Selective Differential Privacy for Large Language Modelscited by 32
  3. 2021De-identification of Privacy-related Entities in Job Postingscited by 12
  4. 2022You Are What You Write: Preserving Privacy in the Era of Large Language Modelscited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 5.

6 papers.