# Forget or Fine-tune? A Comparative Study of Machine Unlearning Strategies for Noisy Label Correction

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.30046 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.30046/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Machine unlearning, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security.
- Builds on 17 of its 30 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 30 Aug 2026.

## Placed in

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

## Builds on (most cited first, 17 of 17)

- [Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1512.03385/) (2015)
- [Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Context](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1405.0312/) (2014)
- [DivideMix: Learning with Noisy Labels as Semi-supervised Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.07394/) (2020)
- [Making Deep Neural Networks Robust to Label Noise: a Loss Correction Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1609.03683/) (2016)
- [Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Net: Selective Forgetting in Deep Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.04933/) (2019)
- [Confident Learning: Estimating Uncertainty in Dataset Labels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.00068/) (2019)
- [SalUn: Empowering Machine Unlearning via Gradient-based Weight Saliency in Both Image Classification and Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.12508/) (2023)
- [Amnesiac Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.10981/) (2020)
- [Unrolling SGD: Understanding Factors Influencing Machine Unlearning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.13398/) (2021)
- [Machine Unlearning of Features and Labels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.11577/) (2021)
- [CleanNet: Transfer Learning for Scalable Image Classifier Training with Label Noise](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.07131/) (2017)
- [What makes unlearning hard and what to do about it](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01257/) (2024)
- [Robust Inference via Generative Classifiers for Handling Noisy Labels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.11300/) (2019)
- [EvidentialMix: Learning with Combined Open-set and Closed-set Noisy Labels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.05704/) (2020)
- [MUNBa: Machine Unlearning via Nash Bargaining](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15537/) (2024)
- [SAP: Corrective Machine Unlearning with Scaled Activation Projection for Label Noise Robustness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.08618/) (2024)
- [ANNE: Adaptive Nearest Neighbors and Eigenvector-based Sample Selection for Robust Learning with Noisy Labels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.01613/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Noisy labels remain a critical challenge for training deep neural networks, since memorizing incorrect labels degrades generalization. Once noisy samples are identified after training, the standard solution is to retrain the model from scratch on the cleaned dataset, which is increasingly expensive as datasets and models grow. Machine Unlearning (MU) has recently emerged as a computationally efficient alternative, but the relative effectiveness of different MU strategies for noisy-label correction remains poorly understood. In this work, we conduct a comparative empirical study of five MU methods (NegGrad, Fine-Tuning (FT), Random Labeling (RL), SalUn, and MUNBa) across symmetric, asymmetric, instance-dependent, and open-set noise on CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, and the real-world noisy dataset Food-101N. Our central finding is that the appropriate unlearning strategy is conditioned on the noise structure. Simple FT is a strong baseline across most closed-set scenarios; RL and SalUn are the most consistently robust methods and, under instance-dependent noise, approach retraining accuracy at a fraction of the computational cost; MUNBa shows advantages mainly under extreme symmetric noise. Under open-set noise, in contrast, we show that retraining on the cleaned subset degrades accuracy relative to the noisy baseline, so approximating the retrained model is not an adequate objective in this regime. On Food-101N, all MU methods remain competitive and achieve accuracies close to retraining despite reducing runtime by an order of magnitude. These findings provide practical guidelines for selecting MU strategies for post-training noisy-label correction.