mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Is Weight Tying Still Beneficial for Decoder-Only LLMs in Private Settings Under DP-SGD?

arXiv 2609.40335 ↗First posted 30 Sep 2026cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent (DP-SGD) is a leading approach for privacy-preserving fine-tuning of large language models (LLMs). Many decoder-only LLMs employ weight tying between input and output embeddings, a design choice originally introduced for parameter efficiency and improved language modeling performance in the non-private setting. However, the impact of weight tying under differentially private training remains largely unexplored. In this work, we investigate the role of weight tying in the DP setting using GPT2 and DistilGPT2 as representative decoder-only architectures. Interestingly, we find that untied embeddings consistently outperform weight-tied models under DP-SGD, achieving gains of up to 4.74% points in accuracy on SST-2, QNLI, and QQP. Beyond improved utility, untying embeddings enables the use of memory-efficient ghost clipping for DP-SGD. By contrast, weight tying introduces shared-parameter interactions that complicate standard ghost norm computation and largely negate its computational advantages. As a result, untied models achieve over 60% lower memory usage while preserving the benefits of ghost clipping. Our results indicate that untied embeddings provide a more effective and scalable design for differentially private training of decoder-only LLMs and highlight the need to revisit standard LLM architectural choices in the privacy-preserving setting.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Sep 2026.

Builds on

22 of 30 references.

References · 22

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  2. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
  3. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
  4. 2016Deep Learning with Differential Privacycited by 2,728
  5. 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,281
  6. 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,189
  7. 2021Membership Inference Attacks From First Principlescited by 878
  8. 2018The Secret Sharer: Evaluating and Testing Unintended Memorization in Neural Networkscited by 864
  9. 2022Quantifying Memorization Across Neural Language Modelscited by 763
  10. 2019Does Learning Require Memorization? A Short Tale about a Long Tailcited by 460
  11. 2021Large Language Models Can Be Strong Differentially Private Learnerscited by 412
  12. 2021Differentially Private Fine-tuning of Language Modelscited by 400
10 more
  1. 2023Multi-Agent Collaboration: Harnessing the Power of Intelligent LLM Agentscited by 333
  2. 2016Using the Output Embedding to Improve Language Modelscited by 272
  3. 2018Subsampled R'enyi Differential Privacy and Analytical Moments Accountantcited by 236
  4. 2018Improving the Gaussian Mechanism for Differential Privacy: Analytical Calibration and Optimal Denoisingcited by 218
  5. 2021Large-Scale Differentially Private BERTcited by 118
  6. 2016Tying Word Vectors and Word Classifiers: A Loss Framework for Language Modelingcited by 92
  7. 2020Scaling up Differentially Private Deep Learning with Fast Per-Example Gradient Clippingcited by 47
  8. 2015Efficient Per-Example Gradient Computationscited by 42
  9. 2019Efficient Per-Example Gradient Computations in Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 17
  10. 2024GraphTeam: Facilitating Large Language Model-based Graph Analysis via Multi-Agent Collaborationcited by 12

Built on by

Not cited yet.