NoT: Federated Unlearning via Weight Negation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Federated unlearning (FU) aims to remove a participant’s data contributions from a trained federated learning (FL) model, ensuring privacy and regulatory compliance. Traditional FU methods often depend on auxiliary storage on either the client or server side or require direct access to the data targeted for removal—a dependency that may not be feasible if the data is no longer available. To overcome these limitations, we propose NoT, a novel and efficient FU algorithm based on weight negation (multiplying by -1), which circumvents the need for additional storage and access to the target data. We argue that effective and efficient unlearning can be achieved by perturbing model parameters away from the set of optimal parameters, yet being well-positioned for quick re-optimization. This technique, though seemingly contradictory, is theoretically grounded: we prove that the weight negation perturbation effectively disrupts inter-layer co-adaptation, inducing unlearning while preserving an approximate optimality property, thereby enabling rapid recovery. Experimental results across three datasets and three model architectures demonstrate that NoT significantly outperforms existing baselines in unlearning efficacy as well as in communication and computational efficiency.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".