Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
To resolve ambiguity in evaluating machine unlearning when redundant data preserves target accuracy, the authors formalize the "deletion floor"—the expected target loss achieved under exact retraining—and establish sharp bounds for approximate unlearning updates around this reference. They derive a conditional neighbor bound and an exact ridge identity that rigorously decouple a model's residual fit from the prediction change caused by data removal. Empirically, retaining just one structural relative in Materials Project benchmarks causes an $\approx 8\times$ drop in median retraining loss, proving that post-deletion accuracy alone cannot diagnose unlearning efficacy.
Retaining even a single structural relative slashes post-deletion retraining loss by $8\times$, revealing that target accuracy after unlearning is often driven by intrinsic dataset redundancy rather than unlearning failure.
In materials machine learning, closely related retained structures can sustain accurate property predictions even after removing a specific record, rendering post-deletion prediction error an ambiguous metric for machine unlearning. To resolve this ambiguity, we define the deletion floor as the expected target loss under a specified retraining procedure at the deleted request. Standard indistinguishability constraints yield a sharp interval bounding an update's target loss around this baseline reference. Theoretically, a conditional neighbor bound links a low deletion floor directly to retained fit, prediction regularity, and local label agreement, while an exact ridge identity isolates residual fit from the prediction change induced by record deletion. Empirically, controlled redundancy sweeps show an $\approx 8\times$ drop in median normalized retraining loss when one retained relative remains after deletion. Across two distinct fitting regimes in a paired Materials Project study, the lower-floor regime also exhibits a larger prediction change on more than 50% of the shared requests. Systematic comparisons against approximate updates and the original model decouple deliberate target suppression from preserved overall model utility. Consequently, request-level unlearning evaluations should report reference loss, prediction change, and retained utility together, interpreting post-deletion accuracy against what retraining itself leaves behind.