Evaluating Machine Unlearning: Applications, Approaches, and Accuracy

IF 2 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":2.0000,"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
评估机器学习:应用、方法和准确性
机器学习(ML)使计算机能够通过识别模式和趋势从经验中学习。尽管ML在提取有价值的数据方面取得了进步,但由于ML模型可能会无意中记住训练数据,因此有些情况下需要删除或删除某些数据。在许多情况下,机器学习模型可能会记住敏感或个人数据,从而引起对数据隐私和安全的担忧。机器学习(MU)技术通过选择性地从训练模型中删除敏感数据而不会显著影响其性能,为这些问题提供了解决方案。同样,我们可以分析和评估MU是否能够成功实现“被遗忘权”。在本文中,我们研究了各种MU方法的准确性和潜在的应用。实验表明,数据驱动的方法在时间和精度方面都是最有效的方法,用最少的训练次数实现了高水平的精度。当进行微调时,整个测试误差从基线模型的14.28%略微上升到14.57%。一种方法的遗忘误差高达99.90%,完整测试误差为20.68%,而重新训练的遗忘误差为100%,测试误差为21.37%。虽然误差最小化噪声保持了性能,但与误差最大化噪声带来的性能下降相比,SCRUB技术的测试误差为21.08%,遗忘误差为81.05%。另一方面,与数据驱动的方法相比,不可知论的方法表现得很慢,产生的结果也不太准确。此外,方法的选择可能取决于任务的独特要求和可用的培训资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Advanced Statistical Characterization and Correlation Analysis of Process Performance Indicators for Optimized Engineering Decisions RogueGPT: Unleashing Jailbreak Prompts on LLMs A Review on Explainable, Federated Multimodal AI for Heart Disease Detection Using ECG, Cardiac Imaging, and Electronic Health Records Numerical and Intelligent Modeling of MHD Casson Nanofluid Heat Transfer in Fractal Porous Cavities for Energy Systems A Smartphone and Web-Based Automated Platform for Segmenting Urinary Tract Infection Using a Deep Learning-Based Approach
×
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:604180095
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