Calibration vs Decision Making: Revisiting the Reliability Paradox in Unlearned Language Models
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866911700993703936 |
|---|---|
| author | Shukla, Divyaksh Modi, Ashutosh |
| author_facet | Shukla, Divyaksh Modi, Ashutosh |
| contents | Machine unlearning aims to remove the influence of specific training data from a model while preserving reliable behavior on the remaining data, making reliable prediction and uncertainty estimation essential for evaluation. Calibration is commonly used as a proxy for reliability in language models, but low calibration error does not necessarily imply reliable decision rules, as models may rely on spurious correlations while remaining well calibrated. We investigate this gap in generative language models using the multiple-choice question-answering evaluation protocol on the TOFU benchmark, measuring probabilistic reliability with calibration metrics (ECE, MCE, Brier) and decision-rule reliability via attribution-based shortcut detection with Integrated Gradients and Local Mutual Information. We find that fine-tuned models achieve low calibration error (ECE ~ 0.04) compared to pretrained models (ECE > 0.5), and models after unlearning retain similarly low calibration despite reduced accuracy on the forget split, while attribution analysis shows increased reliance on correlation-based tokens. These results demonstrate that good calibration can coexist with shortcut-based decision rules after unlearning, extending the reliability paradox to the machine unlearning setting. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2605_20915 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Calibration vs Decision Making: Revisiting the Reliability Paradox in Unlearned Language Models Shukla, Divyaksh Modi, Ashutosh Computation and Language Artificial Intelligence Machine Learning Machine unlearning aims to remove the influence of specific training data from a model while preserving reliable behavior on the remaining data, making reliable prediction and uncertainty estimation essential for evaluation. Calibration is commonly used as a proxy for reliability in language models, but low calibration error does not necessarily imply reliable decision rules, as models may rely on spurious correlations while remaining well calibrated. We investigate this gap in generative language models using the multiple-choice question-answering evaluation protocol on the TOFU benchmark, measuring probabilistic reliability with calibration metrics (ECE, MCE, Brier) and decision-rule reliability via attribution-based shortcut detection with Integrated Gradients and Local Mutual Information. We find that fine-tuned models achieve low calibration error (ECE ~ 0.04) compared to pretrained models (ECE > 0.5), and models after unlearning retain similarly low calibration despite reduced accuracy on the forget split, while attribution analysis shows increased reliance on correlation-based tokens. These results demonstrate that good calibration can coexist with shortcut-based decision rules after unlearning, extending the reliability paradox to the machine unlearning setting. |
| title | Calibration vs Decision Making: Revisiting the Reliability Paradox in Unlearned Language Models |
| topic | Computation and Language Artificial Intelligence Machine Learning |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.20915 |