Papers › Rethinking Machine Unlearning in Image Generation Models
Rethinking Machine Unlearning in Image Generation Models
Renyang Liu, Wenjie Feng, Tianwei Zhang, Wei Zhou, Xueqi Cheng, See-Kiong Ng
With the surge and widespread application of image generation models, data privacy and content safety have become major concerns and attracted great attention from users, service providers, and policymakers. Machine unlearning (MU) is recognized as a cost-effective and promising means to address these challenges. Despite some advancements, image generation model unlearning (IGMU) still faces remarkable gaps in practice, e.g., unclear task discrimination and unlearning guidelines, lack of an effective evaluation framework, and unreliable evaluation metrics. These can hinder the understanding of unlearning mechanisms and the design of practical unlearning algorithms. We perform exhaustive assessments over existing state-of-the-art unlearning algorithms and evaluation standards, and discover several critical flaws and challenges in IGMU tasks. Driven by these limitations, we make several core contributions, to facilitate the comprehensive understanding, standardized categorization, and reliable evaluation of IGMU. Specifically, (1) We design CatIGMU, a novel hierarchical task categorization framework. It provides detailed implementation guidance for IGMU, assisting in the design of unlearning algorithms and the construction of testbeds. (2) We introduce EvalIGMU, a comprehensive evaluation framework. It includes reliable quantitative metrics across five critical aspects. (3) We construct DataIGM, a high-quality unlearning dataset, which can be used for extensive evaluations of IGMU, training content detectors for judgment, and benchmarking the state-of-the-art unlearning algorithms. With EvalIGMU and DataIGM, we discover that most existing IGMU algorithms cannot handle the unlearning well across different evaluation dimensions, especially for preservation and robustness. Code and models are available at https://github.com/ryliu68/IGMU.
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="2506.02761")
Code
Syntology Ran 1 of 1 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · honoured contract.
By repository: official repository: 1 sample from 1 repository, 1 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
1 sample harvested; 1 ran; 1 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 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: 0 of the 1 sample 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 ryliu68/igmu. “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.
d8e3854e11a7974f · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
1 archive method tag without a method page not shown.
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