# Auditing Forgetting in Limited Memory Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.00605 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.00605/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Machine unlearning, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security.
- Builds on 12 of its 13 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 1 Jul 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM safety and security / [Machine unlearning](https://mlsanity.com/safety/machine-unlearning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.04906/) (2020)
- [Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.05262/) (2022)
- [Extracting Training Data from Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.07805/) (2020)
- [REALM: Retrieval-Augmented Language Model Pre-Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.08909/) (2020)
- [FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14251/) (2023)
- [When Not to Trust Language Models: Investigating Effectiveness of Parametric and Non-Parametric Memories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10511/) (2022)
- [Machine Unlearning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.03817/) (2019)
- [Mass-Editing Memory in a Transformer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.07229/) (2022)
- [TOFU: A Task of Fictitious Unlearning for LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.06121/) (2024)
- [Editing Large Language Models: Problems, Methods, and Opportunities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13172/) (2023)
- [Pre-training Limited Memory Language Models with Internal and External Knowledge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.15962/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Beyond Private Training: The New Landscape of AI Privacy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.19456/) (2026)
- [Memory as a cache: Exact context reuse and deletion by construction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.32395/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Limited Memory Language Models (LMLMs) externalize factual knowledge to a database to enable deletion-based unlearning without retraining. Existing evaluations measure post-deletion correctness in aggregate and cannot tell whether a deleted fact persists through residual parametric memory, alternative retrieval paths, or near-neighbor retrieval artifacts. We propose a causal auditing framework that holds the model fixed and varies the database state at inference time across three interventions: FULL, DEL-ON, and DEL-OFF. The framework decomposes post-deletion behavior into parametric leakage L(f), retrieval-mediated correctness R(f), and a retrieval artifact rate grounded in the inference-time retrieval trace. We apply it to 12,228 alias-closure deletions across thirteen databases, including four adversarial topologies (Base, Alias, Noise, Collision) we construct in three domains, and six prompt formulations. Parametric leakage is near zero in every variant and every prompt style: the model rarely returns the deleted answer in the absence of retrieval. The residual that does survive lives in the retrieval graph: retrieval-mediated correctness and the retrieval artifact rate match within rounding everywhere, so post-deletion correctness is, in our audit, predominantly reconstituted from near-neighbor retrieval. This residual ranges from 0.7% on the released LMLM database to 13.6% on the most adversarial variant, and prompt formulation does not independently control how much of a deleted fact survives. These results suggest that, for this class of LMLM and deletion procedure, the unlearning boundary is drawn primarily by the database administrator rather than by the model.