Evaluating Machine Unlearning: Applications, Approaches, and Accuracy

IF 1.8 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Engineering reports : open access Pub Date : 2024-12-09 DOI:10.1002/eng2.13081
Zulfiqar Ali, Asif Muhammad, Rubina Adnan, Tamim Alkhalifah, Sheraz Aslam
{"title":"Evaluating Machine Unlearning: Applications, Approaches, and Accuracy","authors":"Zulfiqar Ali,&nbsp;Asif Muhammad,&nbsp;Rubina Adnan,&nbsp;Tamim Alkhalifah,&nbsp;Sheraz Aslam","doi":"10.1002/eng2.13081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Machine learning (ML) enables computers to learn from experience by identifying patterns and trends. Despite ML's advancements in extracting valuable data, there are instances necessitating the removal or deletion of certain data, as ML models can inadvertently memorize training data. In many cases, ML models may memorize sensitive or personal data, raising concerns about data privacy and security. Machine unlearning (MU) techniques offer a solution to these concerns by selectively removing sensitive data from trained models without significantly compromising their performance. Similarly, we can analyze and evaluate whether MU can successfully achieve the “right to be forgotten.” In this paper, we investigate various MU approaches regarding their accuracy and potential applications. Experiments have shown that the data-driven approach emerged as the most efficient method in terms of both time and accuracy, achieving a high level of precision with a minimal number of training epochs. When fine-tuning, the full test error rises somewhat to 14.57% from the baseline model's 14.28%. One approach shows a high forget error of 99.90% with a full test error of 20.68%, while retraining yields a 100% forget error and a test error of 21.37%. While error-minimizing noise preserves performance, the SCRUB technique results in a 21.08% test error and an 81.05% forget error, in contrast to the degradation brought on by error-maximizing noise. On the other hand, the agnostic approach displayed sluggishness and generated less accurate results compared to the data-driven approach. Furthermore, the choice of approach may depend on the unique requirements of the task and the available training resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":72922,"journal":{"name":"Engineering reports : open access","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eng2.13081","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Engineering reports : open access","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eng2.13081","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Machine learning (ML) enables computers to learn from experience by identifying patterns and trends. Despite ML's advancements in extracting valuable data, there are instances necessitating the removal or deletion of certain data, as ML models can inadvertently memorize training data. In many cases, ML models may memorize sensitive or personal data, raising concerns about data privacy and security. Machine unlearning (MU) techniques offer a solution to these concerns by selectively removing sensitive data from trained models without significantly compromising their performance. Similarly, we can analyze and evaluate whether MU can successfully achieve the “right to be forgotten.” In this paper, we investigate various MU approaches regarding their accuracy and potential applications. Experiments have shown that the data-driven approach emerged as the most efficient method in terms of both time and accuracy, achieving a high level of precision with a minimal number of training epochs. When fine-tuning, the full test error rises somewhat to 14.57% from the baseline model's 14.28%. One approach shows a high forget error of 99.90% with a full test error of 20.68%, while retraining yields a 100% forget error and a test error of 21.37%. While error-minimizing noise preserves performance, the SCRUB technique results in a 21.08% test error and an 81.05% forget error, in contrast to the degradation brought on by error-maximizing noise. On the other hand, the agnostic approach displayed sluggishness and generated less accurate results compared to the data-driven approach. Furthermore, the choice of approach may depend on the unique requirements of the task and the available training resources.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of Mechanical Properties, Color Stability, and Cleaning Efficacy of BioMed Clear Resin-Based Dental Aligners A Semi-Analytic Hybrid Approach for Solving the Buckmaster Equation: Application of the Elzaki Projected Differential Transform Method (EPDTM) Harnessing Free Space Optics for Efficient 6G Fronthaul Networks: Challenges and Opportunities Deep Learning Based Visual Servo for Autonomous Aircraft Refueling Origin of the Paleocene Granite in the Lhasa Terrane of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau and Its Constraints on the Evolution of the Neo-Tethys Ocean
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1