cs.LGFeb 17, 2026

Certified Per-Instance Unlearning Using Individual Sensitivity Bounds

Authors: Hanna Benarroch, Jamal Atif, Olivier Cappé

Organizations: DI-ENS · CMAP

Abstract

Certified machine unlearning can be achieved through noise injection, with differential privacy guarantees obtained by calibrating the noise to worst-case sensitivity. Yet, the influence of individual training points is highly heterogeneous, making such uniform calibration unnecessarily conservative for most deletion requests. We consider certified per-instance unlearning, a data-dependent notion of certified deletion in which the unlearning mechanism and its certificate can adapt to the point being removed. Our framework turns point-specific sensitivity information into formal unlearning guarantees, allowing the amount of noise to reflect the difficulty of the deletion request rather than the worst case. When training is deterministic, we derive explicit per-instance unlearning certificates. For noisy gradient descent, in the case of ridge regression, similar certificates are obtained through high-probability sensitivity bounds. Experiments on NYU-Depth with frozen DINOv2 features show substantial variation in deletion difficulty across points, and demonstrate that per-instance calibration can substantially improve utility over uniform worst-case calibration.

Explore similar work

Mar 3, 2026

Less Noise, Same Certificate: Retain Sensitivity for Unlearning

Certified machine unlearning aims to provably remove the influence of a deletion set UU from a model trained on a dataset SS, by producing an unlearned output that is statistically indistinguishable from retraining on the retain set R:=S∖UR := S\setminus U. Many existing certified unlearning methods adapt techniques from Differential Privacy (DP) and add noise calibrated to global sensitivity, i.e., the worst-case output change over all adjacent datasets. We show that this DP-style calibration is often overly conservative: unlike DP, unlearning requires no indistinguishability across different retain sets, only between each deletion output and retraining on the same retain set RR. Motivated by this distinction, we define retain sensitivity as the worst-case output change over deletions U′U' from R∪U′R\cup U' while keeping RR fixed. While insufficient for DP, retain sensitivity is exactly sufficient for unlearning, allowing for the same certificates with less noise. We validate these reductions in noise theoretically and empirically across several problems, including the weight of minimum spanning trees, PCA, and ERM. Finally, we refine the analysis of two widely used certified unlearning algorithms through the lens of retain sensitivity, leveraging the regularity induced by RR to further reduce noise and improve utility.
May 11, 2026

Unlearning with Asymmetric Sources: Improved Unlearning-Utility Trade-off with Public Data

Noise-based certified machine unlearning currently faces a hard ceiling: the noise magnitude required to certify unlearning typically destroys model utility, particularly for large-scale deletion requests. While leveraging public data is a standard technique in differential privacy to relax this tension, its role in unlearning remains unexplored. We address this gap by introducing Asymmetric Langevin Unlearning (ALU), a framework that uses public data to mitigate privacy costs. We prove that public data injection suppresses the unlearning cost by a factor of O(1/npub2)O(1/n_{\mathrm{pub}}^2), guaranteeing a strict computational advantage over retraining. This establishes a new control mechanism: practitioners can mitigate the need for high noise-and the associated utility loss-by increasing the volume of public data. Crucially, we analyze the realistic setting of distribution mismatch, explicitly characterizing how shifts between public and private sources impact utility. We show that ALU enables mass unlearning of constant dataset fractions -- a regime where standard symmetric methods become impractical -- while maintaining high utility. Empirical evaluations using variational Rényi divergence and membership inference attacks confirm that ALU effectively thwarts privacy attacks while preserving utility under reasonable distribution shifts.
Oct 8, 2026

Minimax Gaussian Mechanisms for Continual Machine Unlearning

Machine unlearning updates a trained model after records are deleted, aiming to match exact retraining without repeating the full training procedure. We develop Gaussian mechanisms for Newton updates under sequential deletion requests. Using Gaussian differential privacy (GDP) and its adaptive composition rule, we show that the full sequence of released models is statistically difficult to distinguish from matched exact retraining. To calibrate these mechanisms for empirical risk minimization, we derive upper bounds on the error of the Newton approximation relative to exact retraining and on how this error changes after each deletion batch. Independent Gaussian noise is calibrated using bounds on the full residual at each release, whereas Gaussian random walk noise uses smaller bounds on residual increments. These bounds yield allocations minimizing the worst-case maximum noise variance across releases under the resulting GDP certification constraints. With count-based bounds, the random walk asymptotically matches the worst-case variance of a single release at deletion cap MM, while independent noise incurs an additional factor of order MM. Set-based bounds can reduce the noise variances by using gradients and Hessians of the deleted records. For singleton deletion, we further show that count-based independent noise, count-based random walk noise, and set-based independent noise are minimax among fixed Gaussian covariances under their respective residual or increment bounds. With set-based bounds, allowing variances to adapt to deleted records can improve on every fixed covariance by a factor of order (log⁡M)2(\log M)^2 on some data sequences. The residual and noise bounds also yield parameter and predictive consistency relative to exact retraining, uniformly over deletion policies. Simulations and a credit default data analysis evaluate bounds, noise variances, and estimation errors.