Papers › Leak@k: Unlearning Does Not Make LLMs Forget Under Probabilistic Decoding

Leak@k: Unlearning Does Not Make LLMs Forget Under Probabilistic Decoding

7 Nov 2025arXiv:2511.04934added by Syntology

Hadi Reisizadeh, Jiajun Ruan, Yiwei Chen, Soumyadeep Pal, Sijia Liu, Mingyi Hong

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Unlearning in large language models (LLMs) is critical for regulatory compliance and for building ethical generative AI systems that avoid producing private, toxic, illegal, or copyrighted content. Despite rapid progress, in this work, we show that \textit{almost all} existing unlearning methods fail to achieve true forgetting in practice. Specifically, while evaluations of these `unlearned' models under deterministic (greedy) decoding often suggest successful knowledge removal using standard benchmarks, we show that sensitive information reliably resurfaces when models are sampled with standard probabilistic decoding. To rigorously capture this vulnerability, we introduce \texttt{leak@k}, a new meta-evaluation metric that quantifies the likelihood of forgotten knowledge reappearing when generating k samples from the model under realistic decoding strategies. Using three widely adopted benchmarks, TOFU, MUSE, and WMDP, we conduct the first large-scale, systematic study of unlearning reliability using \texttt{leak@k} metric. Our findings demonstrate that knowledge leakage persists across methods and tasks, underscoring that current state-of-the-art (SOTA) unlearning techniques provide only limited forgetting. We propose an algorithm, termed Robust Unlearning under LEak@k metric (\texttt{RULE}) to address this concern. We demonstrate that \texttt{RULE} provides an unlearned model for TOFU benchmark with no information leakage for a large number of generation samples. On the MUSE benchmark, \texttt{RULE} outperforms SOTA unlearning methods under the \texttt{leak@k} metric across most sampling budgets k. Codes are available at https://github.com/OptimAI-Lab/Leak-k.

PaperPDFCode Syntology ran

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2511.04934")

Code

Syntology Ran 0 of 2 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 2 have no recorded run.

By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 2 samples from 1 repository, 0 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

OptimAI-Lab/Leak-k found in paper text by Syntology report

Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

2 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

2unverified

Licence: 0 of the 2 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from OptimAI-Lab/Leak-k. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

gen_filter OptimAI-Lab/Leak-k/MUSE/RULE/training_muse/baselines/RULE.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified MIT (permissive) · 79f2ec5d4154a801 · report
main OptimAI-Lab/Leak-k/MUSE/RULE/training_muse/baselines/RULE.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified MIT (permissive) · 7cc7e7d9fb61ea51 · report

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2511.04934, was issued in November 2025, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections