Papers › On Memorization and Privacy Risks of Sharpness Aware Minimization
On Memorization and Privacy Risks of Sharpness Aware Minimization
Young In Kim, Pratiksha Agrawal, Johannes O. Royset, Rajiv Khanna
In many recent works, there is an increased focus on designing algorithms that seek flatter optima for neural network loss optimization as there is empirical evidence that it leads to better generalization performance in many datasets. In this work, we dissect these performance gains through the lens of data memorization in overparameterized models. We define a new metric that helps us identify which data points specifically do algorithms seeking flatter optima do better when compared to vanilla SGD. We find that the generalization gains achieved by Sharpness Aware Minimization (SAM) are particularly pronounced for atypical data points, which necessitate memorization. This insight helps us unearth higher privacy risks associated with SAM, which we verify through exhaustive empirical evaluations. Finally, we propose mitigation strategies to achieve a more desirable accuracy vs privacy tradeoff.
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="2310.00488")
Code
Syntology Ran 7 of 9 code samples harvested from 2 repositories linked to this paper; 2 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · fixture could not drive it; 6 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 9 samples from 2 repositories, 7 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. 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
9 samples harvested; 7 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.
Licence: 1 of the 9 samples is 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 2 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. “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.
18badd533b52adb3 · report
6dc5017fa7e03468 · report
7f77c88b76031ff0 · report
b51437675b710cac · report
578c32174ef2fc47 · report
2f231286618f001d · report
3232aadf384d2f02 · report
386c7184dc049e22 · report
3c015b55f3dbabbf · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
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