With the growing demand for the right to be forgotten, there is an increasing need for machine learning models to forget sensitive data and its impact. To address this, the paradigm of selective forgetting (a.k.a machine unlearning) has been extensively studied, which aims to remove the impact of requested data from a well-trained model without retraining from scratch. Despite its significant success, limited attention has been given to the security vulnerabilities of the unlearning system concerning malicious data update requests. Motivated by this, in this paper, we explore the possibility and feasibility of malicious data update requests during the unlearning process. Specifically, we first propose a new class of malicious selective forgetting attacks, which involves a static scenario where all the malicious data update requests are provided by the adversary at once. Additionally, considering the sequential setting where the data update requests arrive sequentially, we also design a novel framework for sequential forgetting attacks, which is formulated as a stochastic optimal control problem. We also propose novel optimization algorithms that can find the effective malicious data update requests. We perform theoretical analyses for the proposed selective forgetting attacks, and extensive experimental results validate the effectiveness of our proposed selective forgetting attacks. The source code is available in the supplementary material.

Biases with respect to socially-salient attributes of individuals have been well documented in evaluation processes used in settings such as admissions and hiring. We view such an evaluation process as a transformation of a distribution of the true utility of an individual for a task to an observed distribution and model it as a solution to a loss minimization problem subject to an information constraint. Our model has two parameters that have been identified as factors leading to biases: the resource-information trade-off parameter in the information constraint and the risk-averseness parameter in the loss function. We characterize the distributions that arise from our model and study the effect of the parameters on the observed distribution. The outputs of our model enrich the class of distributions that can be used to capture variation across groups in the observed evaluations. We empirically validate our model by fitting real-world datasets and use it to study the effect of interventions in a downstream selection task. These results contribute to an understanding of the emergence of bias in evaluation processes and provide tools to guide the deployment of interventions to mitigate biases.

A.1 Creation of the Multimodal Web Document Dataset A.1.1 Collecting of a Large Number of HTMLFiles Our data collection process begins by considering the 25 most recent Common Crawl6 dumps available at the time of dataset creation. It contains webpages spanning from February 2020 to January/February 2023. We use a modified version of readability-lxml7 to extract the main text from the pages, discarding any pages that contain text of excessively high perplexity. This process yields a total of 41.2 billion documents. Selection of English content To identify non-English content, we apply the FastText classifier (Joulin et al., 2017) to the extracted text, e ectively filtering out 63.6% of the documents. Early text deduplication Often, a set of URLs is crawled repeatedly across di erent Common Crawl snapshots. However, the content of these websites may vary as web administrators make changes over time. Hence, at this stage, we refrain from deduplicating documents based on their URLs. Instead, we perform MinHash (Broder, 1997) deduplication with 16 hashes calculated over 5-grams. To further refine the data, we eliminate documents containing substantial proportions of repeated paragraphs and n-grams, employing the methodology described in MassiveText (Rae et al., 2022).

Musk accuses OpenAI lawyer of trying to'trick' him in combative testimony In his second day on the stand, Elon Musk was at times combative under questioning by OpenAI's lawyer, whom he accused of asking overly complicated questions. Your questions are not simple, he told lawyer William Savitt at one point. They're designed to trick me essentially, Musk is suing fellow OpenAI co-founder Altman and the AI firm, alleging they misled him by shifting the organisation away from its non-profit roots toward a for-profit model. OpenAI says Musk is motivated by jealousy and regret for walking away from the company in 2018. It has also accused Musk, head of xAI, of trying to derail one of his key rivals.