--- license: llama3.2 library_name: transformers base_model: open-unlearning/tofu_Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct_full tags: - unlearning - tofu - npo - llama - memory-laundering - machine-unlearning datasets: - locuslab/TOFU pipeline_tag: text-generation language: - en --- # 3B NPO-Unlearned Llama -- TOFU forget10 This is the **benchmark-selected rank-1 3B checkpoint** from: > **Do Unlearned LLMs Really Forget? A Multi-View Audit of TOFU Unlearning Across 1B, 3B, and 8B Llama Models** > Farhaan Fayaz, Anas Adnan, Danial Norsam, Vidur Pitumbur, Berken Gokcek, Amir Solanki > University College London The model was produced by applying **Negative Preference Optimisation (NPO)** to the TOFU-finetuned Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct checkpoint, targeting the `forget10` split (20 fictitious authors, 200 QA pairs). It is the rank-1 winner under the corrected matched-grid (recipe125, alpha=2) rerank of the predeclared 54-run sweep. ## Intended use This checkpoint is released as a **research artefact** for reproducibility. It is the exact model evaluated in the paper. It is not intended for production deployment. ## Training details | Parameter | Value | |-----------|-------| | Base model | [`open-unlearning/tofu_Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct_full`](https://huggingface.co/open-unlearning/tofu_Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct_full) | | Unlearning method | NPO | | Forget split | `forget10` (20 authors, 200 QA pairs) | | Retain split | `retain90` | | Epochs | 5 | | Learning rate | 2e-5 | | Alpha | 2.0 | | Beta | 0.1 | | Sweep | 54-run grid (2 epochs x 3 LRs x 3 alphas x 3 betas), reranked after the corrected matched-grid alpha=2 refresh | | Selection | Rank-1 by official TOFU `forget_quality` metric (blind) | ## Benchmark and audit results | Metric | Value | |--------|-------| | TOFU forget quality | 0.468 | | TOFU model utility | 0.621 | | Overall novel-recall leak (corrected scorer) | 6.13% | | Format-shift leak rate | 22.8% | | Best-of-N prompt-level leak | 9.9% | | Chain-of-clues final-turn leak | 42.6% | | Masked probe top-1 accuracy (last layer) | 0.620 | | Avg log-probability on forgotten answer | -3.20 | | Forgotten-answer log-likelihood shift vs TOFU-full | +0.424 | | RTT recovery delta | +0.51 pp | | Quantization delta (INT8 vs FP16) | -0.03 pp | Under the corrected novel-recall scorer (which excludes prompt-echoed content), base models leak near zero (0.3%), confirming that detected leakage is genuine TOFU-specific knowledge. The TOFU-full model leaks 7.85% at this scale. This unlearned checkpoint leaks 6.13% -- a reduction of 1.73 pp. However, chain-of-clues multi-turn prompting still extracts 42.6% of the forgotten facts, and the forgotten-answer log-likelihood actually *increases* by +0.424 relative to TOFU-full, indicating that the internal target signal is not consistently suppressed even though behavioural suppression partially succeeds. Full audit details, including per-family breakdowns, are reported in the paper and the [GitHub repository](https://github.com/Naahraf27/memory-laundering). ## How to load ```python from transformers import AutoModelForCausalLM, AutoTokenizer model_id = "Naahraf27/npo_llama-3.2-3b-instruct_forget10_ep5_lr2e-5_alpha2.0_beta0.1" tokenizer = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained(model_id) model = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained(model_id, torch_dtype="bfloat16", device_map="auto") ``` ## Citation If you use this checkpoint, please cite: ```bibtex @article{fayaz2026memory, title={Do Unlearned LLMs Really Forget? A Multi-View Audit of TOFU Unlearning Across 1B, 3B, and 8B Llama Models}, author={Fayaz, Farhaan and Adnan, Anas and Norsam, Danial and Pitumbur, Vidur and Gokcek, Berken and Solanki, Amir}, year={2026}, institution={University College London} } ```