--- license: cc0-1.0 language: - en size_categories: - n<1K task_categories: - text-generation tags: - unlearning - machine-unlearning - knowledge-editing - model-editing - benchmark - wikidata pretty_name: Fine-Grained Knowledge Unlearning (Namesake Benchmark) configs: - config_name: default data_files: - split: train path: dataset.csv - config_name: scored data_files: - split: train path: dataset_scored.csv --- # Fine-Grained Knowledge Unlearning — Namesake Benchmark A benchmark for **fine-grained knowledge unlearning**: can a method remove a fact about entity **X** without damaging the *same fact* on entity **Y**, when X and Y have (near-)identical names and share exactly that one attribute? Each sample is a pair of real people who - share an identical or near-identical name, - share **one** career element (e.g. both are basketball players) — the fact to unlearn on X and retain on Y, - differ on everything else (birth year, birthplace, teams, works, …) — the disambiguators used to point a model at the right namesake, - are approximately equally famous (Wikipedia pageview ratio ≤ 20, both ≥ 1,500 annual views, plus a probe-model log-prob balance term). The point is that a coarse unlearning method will delete "the Michael Jordan who plays basketball" rather than "*this* Michael Jordan", and the retain side measures exactly that collateral damage. **Example.** Unlearn *"James Allen (b. 1864) → writer"*, then check that *"James Lane Allen, born in 1849, is a ___"* still yields *writer*. ## Files | file | rows | what it is | |---|---|---| | `dataset.csv` | 247 | the benchmark — one row per pair, X = more famous (unlearn target), Y = less famous (retention probe) | | `dataset_scored.csv` | 1,701 | **every** candidate pair with probe-model scores, before the final filter — re-cut at your own thresholds without re-running the model | | `unlearning_dataset.json` | 247 | the same 247 pairs in EasyEdit-style records (download directly; not a `configs` entry) | ```python from datasets import load_dataset ds = load_dataset("ernlavr/fine_grained_unlearning") # the 247 pairs scored = load_dataset("ernlavr/fine_grained_unlearning", "scored") # all 1,701 scored ``` `unlearning_dataset.json` holds nested records, so fetch it as a file: ```python import json from huggingface_hub import hf_hub_download p = hf_hub_download("ernlavr/fine_grained_unlearning", "unlearning_dataset.json", repo_type="dataset") records = json.load(open(p)) ``` ```json { "case_id": 0, "pair_id": "Q1371577_Q3297881", "unlearn": {"subject", "prompt", "disambiguated_prompt", "paraphrases", "target"}, "retain": {"subject", "prompt", "paraphrases", "target"}, "disambiguation_check": {"x": {"prompt", "target"}, "y": {"prompt", "target"}}, "metadata": {"qid_x", "qid_y", "name_match_type", "career_category", "family_relation", "fame_ratio", "scores": {...}} } ``` ## Schema (`dataset.csv`) **Identity** — `pair_id`, `qid_x`, `qid_y` (Wikidata QIDs), `name_x`, `name_y`, `description_x`, `description_y`, `birth_year_x`, `birth_year_y`. **Pair properties** — `name_match_type` (see below), `shared_occupation` (the fact to unlearn/retain), `career_category`, `family_relation`. **Fame** — `pageviews_x`, `pageviews_y` (12-month enwiki, 2025-07 → 2026-07), `sitelinks_x`, `sitelinks_y`, `fame_ratio` (max/min pageviews). **Prompts** — `unlearn_prompt` (bare name), `unlearn_prompt_disambiguated`, `unlearn_target`, `retain_prompt`, `retain_target`, `hint_attr`, `hint_x`, `hint_y`, `probe_attr`, `probe_{x,y}_prompt`, `probe_{x,y}_target`, `probe_options`. **Probe scores** — `know_{x,y}`, `margin_{x,y}`, `shared_{x,y}`, `shared_ambig`, `shared_margin_{x,y}`, `balance`, `quality`. Two gotchas: - `probe_options` is a **JSON-encoded string** — `json.loads` it. It holds every candidate `[attr, value_x, value_y]` triple; the pipeline picked the one with the best worst-case margin and exposed it as `probe_attr`. - `family_relation` is an **empty string** when absent (pandas reads it as NaN). Filter on specific values. **`different_from` is not a family relation** — it is Wikidata's explicit distinctness marker (P1889), i.e. *positive* evidence the two items are different people. Of the 247 pairs: 41 are blood/marital relatives (`child` 22, `father` 14, `sibling` 4, `spouse` 1), 23 are `different_from`, 183 unmarked. Drop the 41 if a shared family context would confound your experiment. ## Score definitions All scores are **mean per-token log-probs** of the gold continuation under the probe model (`meta-llama/Llama-3.1-8B`, 39,943 continuations scored). | column | meaning | |---|---| | `know_x`, `know_y` | log-prob of the correct differing attribute given the disambiguated prompt. High ⇒ the model knows the entity *and* resolves the right namesake from the hint. | | `margin_x`, `margin_y` | `know` minus the log-prob of the **partner's** value on the same prompt. Positive both ways ⇒ the two representations are separable pre-edit (otherwise the retention eval is meaningless). | | `shared_x`, `shared_y` | strength of the shared occupation fact — the unlearn/retain target. | | `shared_ambig` | occupation log-prob on the **bare-name** prompt (name-level prior, no disambiguation). | | `shared_margin_x/y` | `shared` minus the best of 8 distractor occupations. | | `balance` | \|`know_x` − `know_y`\| — representation-level fame balance. | | `quality` | the pipeline's ranking score (capped margins − balance). | The published 247 were cut with `margin_{x,y} > 0` **and** `shared_margin_{x,y} > 0`, ranked by `quality`, capped at 2 pairs per unlearn entity. **See Limitations — that threshold is too loose, and you probably want to re-cut.** ## Name closeness (`name_match_type`) | value | meaning | example | n | |---|---|---|---| | `edit2` | edit distance 2 inside one token, shared 2-char prefix | Steven / Stephen | 63 | | `initial` | added middle name/initial | James Allen / James Lane Allen | 53 | | `edit1` | edit distance 1 | Isiah Thomas / Isaiah Thomas | 50 | | `suffix` | Jr/Sr/II/III variants | Larry Nance / Larry Nance Jr. | 33 | | `exact` | identical labels | Mark Davis / Mark Davis | 31 | | `middle_variant` | different middle token | George E. Johnson / George L. Johnson | 17 | | `diacritic` | differ only in diacritics/punctuation | José López / Jose Lopez | 0 | ## Composition **Career category** — literature 45, football 38, basketball 36, acting 35, music 32, politics 27, filmmaking 9, visual_art 5, baseball 4, law 3, then a tail of 11 categories with ≤ 2 pairs each. **Probe attribute** — birthplace 186, citizenship 35, team 14, birth_year 10, work 2. **Fame balance** — `fame_ratio` mean 4.86, median 2.85, max 19.56; the least viewed entity has 1,505 annual pageviews. ## ⚠️ Limitations — read before using An audit of the published 247 pairs generated greedily from the probe model and scored the output with a synonym map (so "jurist" counts for `lawyer`). **The `usable` figures below are that heuristic, not human-verified ground truth** — treat them as directional. **~45% of the 247 pairs fail the benchmark's core premise**, i.e. the model does not demonstrably hold the fact you are asking a method to unlearn: - both occupations produced correctly: **150/247 (61%)** - cross-contamination (X's generation leaks Y's attribute or vice versa): **9.3%** — low; the disambiguation hints do work - usable (occupation right for both **and** no leak): **136/247 (55%)** - for 37 pairs (15%) the model gets the occupation wrong for *both* people **The published `> 0` threshold is the cause, and it is cheap to fix.** A stricter cut on the *same* log-prob columns raises quality sharply, and because `dataset_scored.csv` ships all 1,701 scored pairs, re-cutting needs no GPU: | gate | pairs | usable | |---|---|---| | `shared_margin > 0 & margin > 0` (as published) | 247 | 55% | | `shared_margin > 1 & margin > 0.5` | 104 | 73% | | **`shared_margin > 2 & margin > 0.5`** (recommended) | **69** | **78%** | | `shared_margin > 2 & margin > 1` | 50 | 80% | ```python import pandas as pd s = pd.read_csv("dataset_scored.csv") smin = s[["shared_margin_x", "shared_margin_y"]].min(axis=1) mmin = s[["margin_x", "margin_y"]].min(axis=1) strict = s[(smin > 2) & (mmin > 0.5)] # 69 pairs ``` Of the three log-prob signals, `shared_margin` is the best predictor of a usable pair (correlation 0.352), ahead of `margin` (0.160). A "regret" metric (`logp(gold) − logp(model's own greedy continuation)`) was also tested and did **worse** (0.244), so it is not included. **A residual ~20% is a data problem no threshold can fix.** Wikidata's `P106` (occupation) includes peripheral tags, so the "shared career" is sometimes one neither person is actually known for — **John Smith the explorer is tagged `writer`; William Clark of Lewis & Clark is tagged `politician`**. This is strongly category-dependent: | category | pairs | usable | |---|---|---| | music | 32 | 84% | | visual_art | 5 | 80% | | acting | 35 | 66% | | basketball | 36 | 56% | | literature | 45 | 47% | | football | 38 | 42% | | politics | 27 | 41% | | filmmaking | 9 | 33% | Literature is both the **largest** category (45 pairs) and near the bottom — `writer` is Wikidata's worst catch-all. A cheap extra filter is to require `shared_occupation` to appear in *both* Wikidata one-line descriptions (`description_x`/`description_y`), which splits usability 62% vs 44%. **Other caveats.** The fame filter is purely *relative* (ratio ≤ 20) with no absolute ceiling, so 8 pairs have `pageviews_x > 1M` — including Donald Trump / Donald Trump Jr. under `businessperson`, a career neither is primarily known for. Scores are specific to Llama-3.1-8B; re-probe for another model. English Wikipedia only, so fame and coverage are anglophone-biased, and the underlying Wikidata gender/occupation distribution is inherited unchanged. ## Provenance Built from [Wikidata](https://www.wikidata.org) (CC0) via WDQS SPARQL, plus the [Wikimedia Pageviews API](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/) for fame estimation (12 months, 2025-07-01 → 2026-07-01). Pipeline: mine humans per occupation (≥ 5 sitelinks) → pair by name closeness within an occupation → fetch attributes and family links → filter for fame balance, single shared career and sufficient disambiguators → score with Llama-3.1-8B and cut. 11,024 candidate pairs → 5,168 after a sitelink prefilter → 1,701 after attribute/fame filtering → 247 published. ## Licence CC0-1.0, following Wikidata. Pageview counts are aggregate Wikimedia statistics. All entities are public figures with English Wikipedia articles; every attribute is drawn from public Wikidata statements.