Towards Adversarial Evaluations for Inexact Machine Unlearning

Shashwat Goel, Ameya Prabhu, Amartya Sanyal, Ser-Nam Lim, Philip Torr +1 more
1/17/2022
cs.LGcs.CV

Official code: shash42/Evaluating-Inexact-Unlearning (12 stars, last commit 2023-08-08).

Abstract

Machine Learning models face increased concerns regarding the storage of personal user data and adverse impacts of corrupted data like backdoors or systematic bias. Machine Unlearning can address these by allowing post-hoc deletion of affected training data from a learned model. Achieving this task exactly is computationally expensive; consequently, recent works have proposed inexact unlearning algorithms to solve this approximately as well as evaluation methods to test the effectiveness of these algorithms. In this work, we first outline some necessary criteria for evaluation methods and show no existing evaluation satisfies them all. Then, we design a stronger black-box evaluation method called the Interclass Confusion (IC) test which adversarially manipulates data during training to detect the insufficiency of unlearning procedures. We also propose two analytically motivated baseline methods~(EU-k and CF-k) which outperform several popular inexact unlearning methods. Overall, we demonstrate how adversarial evaluation strategies can help in analyzing various unlearning phenomena which can guide the development of stronger unlearning algorithms.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations(1)

121Shell, PythonJan 12, 20223 years ago

Cite this paper

@article{goel2022towards,
  title  = {Towards Adversarial Evaluations for Inexact Machine Unlearning},
  author = {Shashwat Goel and Ameya Prabhu and Amartya Sanyal and Ser-Nam Lim and Philip Torr and Ponnurangam Kumaraguru},
  year   = {2022},
  eprint = {2201.06640},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.06640}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2201.06640.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2201.06640)

Discussion