arXiv subjects

Seth Neel

Publications and source records attributed to Seth Neel.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

CheckMIABench: Firm Foundations For Membership Inference Attacks on Language Models

Membership inference attacks (MIAs) are a canonical way to assess a machine learning model's privacy properties. Although several attempts have been made to evaluate MIAs on language models, the extant literature has suffered numerous difficulties in constructing clean evaluations to test new techniques. In particular, subtle distribution shifts between member and non-member sets can undermine the statistical validity of MIAs; recent work has underscored this by showing that "blind" methods with no access to the underlying model can perform far better than published methods on the same benchmarks. This paper constructs a benchmark for principled evaluation of MIAs against LLMs, by leveraging the insight that training data before and after a fixed point during training are drawn from the same distribution. Therefore, all open-source models with intermediate checkpoints and public training data can be converted into MIA testbeds. We apply our framework to a half-dozen published attacks on the Pythia and OLMo family of models, from 70M to 7B parameters. To facilitate further privacy research, we open-source a modular library for designing and implementing attacks in this setting: https://github.com/safr-ai-lab/pandora_llm.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

GOPHER: Optimization-based Phenotype Randomization for Genome-Wide Association Studies with Differential Privacy

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) are an essential tool in biomedical research for identifying genetic factors linked to health and disease. However, publicly releasing GWAS summary statistics poses well-recognized privacy risks, including the potential to infer an individual's participation in the study or to reveal sensitive phenotypic information (e.g., disease status). While differential privacy (DP) offers a rigorous mathematical framework for mitigating these risks, existing DP techniques for GWAS either introduce excessive noise or restrict the release to a limited set of results. In this work, we present practical DP mechanisms for releasing the complete set of genome-wide association statistics with privacy guarantees. We demonstrate the accuracy of the privacy-preserving statistics released by our mechanisms on a range of GWAS datasets from the UK Biobank, utilizing both real and simulated phenotypes. We introduce two key techniques to overcome the limitations of prior approaches: (1) an optimization-based randomization mechanism that directly minimizes the expected error in GWAS results to enhance utility, and (2) the use of personalized priors, derived from predictive models privately trained on a subset of the dataset, to enable sample-specific optimization which further reduces the amount of noise introduced by DP. Overall, our work provides practical tools for accurately releasing comprehensive GWAS results with provable protection of study participants.

q-bio.QM↗

arXiv2025

Efficiently Verifiable Proofs of Data Attribution

Data attribution methods aim to answer useful counterfactual questions like "what would a ML model's prediction be if it were trained on a different dataset?" However, estimation of data attribution models through techniques like empirical influence or "datamodeling" remains very computationally expensive. This causes a critical trust issue: if only a few computationally rich parties can obtain data attributions, how can resource-constrained parties trust that the provided attributions are indeed "good," especially when they are used for important downstream applications (e.g., data pricing)? In this paper, we address this trust issue by proposing an interactive verification paradigm for data attribution. An untrusted and computationally powerful Prover learns data attributions, and then engages in an interactive proof with a resource-constrained Verifier. Our main result is a protocol that provides formal completeness, soundness, and efficiency guarantees in the sense of Probably-Approximately-Correct (PAC) verification. Specifically, if both Prover and Verifier follow the protocol, the Verifier accepts data attributions that are {\epsilon}-close to the optimal data attributions (in terms of the Mean Squared Error) with probability 1-{\delta}. Conversely, if the Prover arbitrarily deviates from the protocol, even with infinite compute, then this is detected (or it still yields data attributions to the Verifier) except with probability {\delta}. Importantly, our protocol ensures the Verifier's workload, measured by the number of independent model retrainings it must perform, scales only as O(1/{\epsilon}); i.e., independently of the dataset size. At a technical level, our results apply to efficiently verifying any linear function over the boolean hypercube computed by the Prover, making them broadly applicable to various attribution tasks.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Machine Unlearning Doesn't Do What You Think: Lessons for Generative AI Policy and Research

"Machine unlearning" is a popular proposed solution for mitigating the existence of content in an AI model that is problematic for legal or moral reasons, including privacy, copyright, safety, and more. For example, unlearning is often invoked as a solution for removing the effects of specific information from a generative-AI model's parameters, e.g., a particular individual's personal data or the inclusion of copyrighted content in the model's training data. Unlearning is also proposed as a way to prevent a model from generating targeted types of information in its outputs, e.g., generations that closely resemble a particular individual's data or reflect the concept of "Spiderman." Both of these goals--the targeted removal of information from a model and the targeted suppression of information from a model's outputs--present various technical and substantive challenges. We provide a framework for ML researchers and policymakers to think rigorously about these challenges, identifying several mismatches between the goals of unlearning and feasible implementations. These mismatches explain why unlearning is not a general-purpose solution for circumscribing generative-AI model behavior in service of broader positive impact.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Attribute-to-Delete: Machine Unlearning via Datamodel Matching

Machine unlearning -- efficiently removing the effect of a small "forget set" of training data on a pre-trained machine learning model -- has recently attracted significant research interest. Despite this interest, however, recent work shows that existing machine unlearning techniques do not hold up to thorough evaluation in non-convex settings. In this work, we introduce a new machine unlearning technique that exhibits strong empirical performance even in such challenging settings. Our starting point is the perspective that the goal of unlearning is to produce a model whose outputs are statistically indistinguishable from those of a model re-trained on all but the forget set. This perspective naturally suggests a reduction from the unlearning problem to that of data attribution, where the goal is to predict the effect of changing the training set on a model's outputs. Thus motivated, we propose the following meta-algorithm, which we call Datamodel Matching (DMM): given a trained model, we (a) use data attribution to predict the output of the model if it were re-trained on all but the forget set points; then (b) fine-tune the pre-trained model to match these predicted outputs. In a simple convex setting, we show how this approach provably outperforms a variety of iterative unlearning algorithms. Empirically, we use a combination of existing evaluations and a new metric based on the KL-divergence to show that even in non-convex settings, DMM achieves strong unlearning performance relative to existing algorithms. An added benefit of DMM is that it is a meta-algorithm, in the sense that future advances in data attribution translate directly into better unlearning algorithms, pointing to a clear direction for future progress in unlearning.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Machine Unlearning Fails to Remove Data Poisoning Attacks

We revisit the efficacy of several practical methods for approximate machine unlearning developed for large-scale deep learning. In addition to complying with data deletion requests, one often-cited potential application for unlearning methods is to remove the effects of poisoned data. We experimentally demonstrate that, while existing unlearning methods have been demonstrated to be effective in a number of settings, they fail to remove the effects of data poisoning across a variety of types of poisoning attacks (indiscriminate, targeted, and a newly-introduced Gaussian poisoning attack) and models (image classifiers and LLMs); even when granted a relatively large compute budget. In order to precisely characterize unlearning efficacy, we introduce new evaluation metrics for unlearning based on data poisoning. Our results suggest that a broader perspective, including a wider variety of evaluations, are required to avoid a false sense of confidence in machine unlearning procedures for deep learning without provable guarantees. Moreover, while unlearning methods show some signs of being useful to efficiently remove poisoned data without having to retrain, our work suggests that these methods are not yet ``ready for prime time,'' and currently provide limited benefit over retraining.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Pandora's White-Box: Precise Training Data Detection and Extraction in Large Language Models

In this paper we develop state-of-the-art privacy attacks against Large Language Models (LLMs), where an adversary with some access to the model tries to learn something about the underlying training data. Our headline results are new membership inference attacks (MIAs) against pretrained LLMs that perform hundreds of times better than baseline attacks, and a pipeline showing that over 50% (!) of the fine-tuning dataset can be extracted from a fine-tuned LLM in natural settings. We consider varying degrees of access to the underlying model, pretraining and fine-tuning data, and both MIAs and training data extraction. For pretraining data, we propose two new MIAs: a supervised neural network classifier that predicts training data membership on the basis of (dimensionality-reduced) model gradients, as well as a variant of this attack that only requires logit access to the model by leveraging recent model-stealing work on LLMs. To our knowledge this is the first MIA that explicitly incorporates model-stealing information. Both attacks outperform existing black-box baselines, and our supervised attack closes the gap between MIA attack success against LLMs and the strongest known attacks for other machine learning models. In fine-tuning, we find that a simple attack based on the ratio of the loss between the base and fine-tuned models is able to achieve near-perfect MIA performance; we then leverage our MIA to extract a large fraction of the fine-tuning dataset from fine-tuned Pythia and Llama models. Our code is available at github.com/safr-ai-lab/pandora-llm.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2023

Privacy Issues in Large Language Models: A Survey

This is the first survey of the active area of AI research that focuses on privacy issues in Large Language Models (LLMs). Specifically, we focus on work that red-teams models to highlight privacy risks, attempts to build privacy into the training or inference process, enables efficient data deletion from trained models to comply with existing privacy regulations, and tries to mitigate copyright issues. Our focus is on summarizing technical research that develops algorithms, proves theorems, and runs empirical evaluations. While there is an extensive body of legal and policy work addressing these challenges from a different angle, that is not the focus of our survey. Nevertheless, these works, along with recent legal developments do inform how these technical problems are formalized, and so we discuss them briefly in Section 1. While we have made our best effort to include all the relevant work, due to the fast moving nature of this research we may have missed some recent work. If we have missed some of your work please contact us, as we will attempt to keep this survey relatively up to date. We are maintaining a repository with the list of papers covered in this survey and any relevant code that was publicly available at https://github.com/safr-ml-lab/survey-llm.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2023

MoPe: Model Perturbation-based Privacy Attacks on Language Models

Recent work has shown that Large Language Models (LLMs) can unintentionally leak sensitive information present in their training data. In this paper, we present Model Perturbations (MoPe), a new method to identify with high confidence if a given text is in the training data of a pre-trained language model, given white-box access to the models parameters. MoPe adds noise to the model in parameter space and measures the drop in log-likelihood at a given point $x$, a statistic we show approximates the trace of the Hessian matrix with respect to model parameters. Across language models ranging from $70$M to $12$B parameters, we show that MoPe is more effective than existing loss-based attacks and recently proposed perturbation-based methods. We also examine the role of training point order and model size in attack success, and empirically demonstrate that MoPe accurately approximate the trace of the Hessian in practice. Our results show that the loss of a point alone is insufficient to determine extractability -- there are training points we can recover using our method that have average loss. This casts some doubt on prior works that use the loss of a point as evidence of memorization or unlearning.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

Black-Box Training Data Identification in GANs via Detector Networks

Since their inception Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) have been popular generative models across images, audio, video, and tabular data. In this paper we study whether given access to a trained GAN, as well as fresh samples from the underlying distribution, if it is possible for an attacker to efficiently identify if a given point is a member of the GAN's training data. This is of interest for both reasons related to copyright, where a user may want to determine if their copyrighted data has been used to train a GAN, and in the study of data privacy, where the ability to detect training set membership is known as a membership inference attack. Unlike the majority of prior work this paper investigates the privacy implications of using GANs in black-box settings, where the attack only has access to samples from the generator, rather than access to the discriminator as well. We introduce a suite of membership inference attacks against GANs in the black-box setting and evaluate our attacks on image GANs trained on the CIFAR10 dataset and tabular GANs trained on genomic data. Our most successful attack, called The Detector, involve training a second network to score samples based on their likelihood of being generated by the GAN, as opposed to a fresh sample from the distribution. We prove under a simple model of the generator that the detector is an approximately optimal membership inference attack. Across a wide range of tabular and image datasets, attacks, and GAN architectures, we find that adversaries can orchestrate non-trivial privacy attacks when provided with access to samples from the generator. At the same time, the attack success achievable against GANs still appears to be lower compared to other generative and discriminative models; this leaves the intriguing open question of whether GANs are in fact more private, or if it is a matter of developing stronger attacks.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

In-Context Unlearning: Language Models as Few Shot Unlearners

Machine unlearning, the study of efficiently removing the impact of specific training instances on a model, has garnered increased attention in recent years due to regulatory guidelines such as the \emph{Right to be Forgotten}. Achieving precise unlearning typically involves fully retraining the model and is computationally infeasible in case of very large models such as Large Language Models (LLMs). To this end, recent work has proposed several algorithms which approximate the removal of training data without retraining the model. These algorithms crucially rely on access to the model parameters in order to update them, an assumption that may not hold in practice due to computational constraints or having only query access to the LLMs. In this work, we propose a new class of unlearning methods for LLMs called ``In-Context Unlearning.'' This method unlearns instances from the model by simply providing specific kinds of inputs in context, without the need to update model parameters. To unlearn specific training instances, we present these instances to the LLMs at inference time along with labels that differ from their ground truth. Our experimental results demonstrate that in-context unlearning performs on par with, or in some cases outperforms other state-of-the-art methods that require access to model parameters, effectively removing the influence of specific instances on the model while preserving test accuracy.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

PRIMO: Private Regression in Multiple Outcomes

We introduce a new private regression setting we call Private Regression in Multiple Outcomes (PRIMO), inspired by the common situation where a data analyst wants to perform a set of $l$ regressions while preserving privacy, where the features $X$ are shared across all $l$ regressions, and each regression $i \in [l]$ has a different vector of outcomes $y_i$. Naively applying existing private linear regression techniques $l$ times leads to a $\sqrt{l}$ multiplicative increase in error over the standard linear regression setting. We apply a variety of techniques including sufficient statistics perturbation (SSP) and geometric projection-based methods to develop scalable algorithms that outperform this baseline across a range of parameter regimes. In particular, we obtain no dependence on l in the asymptotic error when $l$ is sufficiently large. Empirically, on the task of genomic risk prediction with multiple phenotypes we find that even for values of $l$ far smaller than the theory would predict, our projection-based method improves the accuracy relative to the variant that doesn't use the projection.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

Feature Importance Disparities for Data Bias Investigations

It is widely held that one cause of downstream bias in classifiers is bias present in the training data. Rectifying such biases may involve context-dependent interventions such as training separate models on subgroups, removing features with bias in the collection process, or even conducting real-world experiments to ascertain sources of bias. Despite the need for such data bias investigations, few automated methods exist to assist practitioners in these efforts. In this paper, we present one such method that given a dataset $X$ consisting of protected and unprotected features, outcomes $y$, and a regressor $h$ that predicts $y$ given $X$, outputs a tuple $(f_j, g)$, with the following property: $g$ corresponds to a subset of the training dataset $(X, y)$, such that the $j^{th}$ feature $f_j$ has much larger (or smaller) influence in the subgroup $g$, than on the dataset overall, which we call feature importance disparity (FID). We show across $4$ datasets and $4$ common feature importance methods of broad interest to the machine learning community that we can efficiently find subgroups with large FID values even over exponentially large subgroup classes and in practice these groups correspond to subgroups with potentially serious bias issues as measured by standard fairness metrics.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2022

On the Privacy Risks of Algorithmic Recourse

As predictive models are increasingly being employed to make consequential decisions, there is a growing emphasis on developing techniques that can provide algorithmic recourse to affected individuals. While such recourses can be immensely beneficial to affected individuals, potential adversaries could also exploit these recourses to compromise privacy. In this work, we make the first attempt at investigating if and how an adversary can leverage recourses to infer private information about the underlying model's training data. To this end, we propose a series of novel membership inference attacks which leverage algorithmic recourse. More specifically, we extend the prior literature on membership inference attacks to the recourse setting by leveraging the distances between data instances and their corresponding counterfactuals output by state-of-the-art recourse methods. Extensive experimentation with real world and synthetic datasets demonstrates significant privacy leakage through recourses. Our work establishes unintended privacy leakage as an important risk in the widespread adoption of recourse methods.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2021

Adaptive Machine Unlearning

Data deletion algorithms aim to remove the influence of deleted data points from trained models at a cheaper computational cost than fully retraining those models. However, for sequences of deletions, most prior work in the non-convex setting gives valid guarantees only for sequences that are chosen independently of the models that are published. If people choose to delete their data as a function of the published models (because they don't like what the models reveal about them, for example), then the update sequence is adaptive. In this paper, we give a general reduction from deletion guarantees against adaptive sequences to deletion guarantees against non-adaptive sequences, using differential privacy and its connection to max information. Combined with ideas from prior work which give guarantees for non-adaptive deletion sequences, this leads to extremely flexible algorithms able to handle arbitrary model classes and training methodologies, giving strong provable deletion guarantees for adaptive deletion sequences. We show in theory how prior work for non-convex models fails against adaptive deletion sequences, and use this intuition to design a practical attack against the SISA algorithm of Bourtoule et al. [2021] on CIFAR-10, MNIST, Fashion-MNIST.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2020

Descent-to-Delete: Gradient-Based Methods for Machine Unlearning

We study the data deletion problem for convex models. By leveraging techniques from convex optimization and reservoir sampling, we give the first data deletion algorithms that are able to handle an arbitrarily long sequence of adversarial updates while promising both per-deletion run-time and steady-state error that do not grow with the length of the update sequence. We also introduce several new conceptual distinctions: for example, we can ask that after a deletion, the entire state maintained by the optimization algorithm is statistically indistinguishable from the state that would have resulted had we retrained, or we can ask for the weaker condition that only the observable output is statistically indistinguishable from the observable output that would have resulted from retraining. We are able to give more efficient deletion algorithms under this weaker deletion criterion.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2019

Optimal, Truthful, and Private Securities Lending

We consider a fundamental dynamic allocation problem motivated by the problem of $\textit{securities lending}$ in financial markets, the mechanism underlying the short selling of stocks. A lender would like to distribute a finite number of identical copies of some scarce resource to $n$ clients, each of whom has a private demand that is unknown to the lender. The lender would like to maximize the usage of the resource $\mbox{---}$ avoiding allocating more to a client than her true demand $\mbox{---}$ but is constrained to sell the resource at a pre-specified price per unit, and thus cannot use prices to incentivize truthful reporting. We first show that the Bayesian optimal algorithm for the one-shot problem $\mbox{---}$ which maximizes the resource's expected usage according to the posterior expectation of demand, given reports $\mbox{---}$ actually incentivizes truthful reporting as a dominant strategy. Because true demands in the securities lending problem are often sensitive information that the client would like to hide from competitors, we then consider the problem under the additional desideratum of (joint) differential privacy. We give an algorithm, based on simple dynamics for computing market equilibria, that is simultaneously private, approximately optimal, and approximately dominant-strategy truthful. Finally, we leverage this private algorithm to construct an approximately truthful, optimal mechanism for the extensive form multi-round auction where the lender does not have access to the true joint distributions between clients' requests and demands.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2019

A New Analysis of Differential Privacy's Generalization Guarantees

We give a new proof of the "transfer theorem" underlying adaptive data analysis: that any mechanism for answering adaptively chosen statistical queries that is differentially private and sample-accurate is also accurate out-of-sample. Our new proof is elementary and gives structural insights that we expect will be useful elsewhere. We show: 1) that differential privacy ensures that the expectation of any query on the posterior distribution on datasets induced by the transcript of the interaction is close to its true value on the data distribution, and 2) sample accuracy on its own ensures that any query answer produced by the mechanism is close to its posterior expectation with high probability. This second claim follows from a thought experiment in which we imagine that the dataset is resampled from the posterior distribution after the mechanism has committed to its answers. The transfer theorem then follows by summing these two bounds, and in particular, avoids the "monitor argument" used to derive high probability bounds in prior work. An upshot of our new proof technique is that the concrete bounds we obtain are substantially better than the best previously known bounds, even though the improvements are in the constants, rather than the asymptotics (which are known to be tight). As we show, our new bounds outperform the naive "sample-splitting" baseline at dramatically smaller dataset sizes compared to the previous state of the art, bringing techniques from this literature closer to practicality.

cs.LG↗