跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.10106 · v1

Beyond Prompt Attacks: Least-Action Auditing of Concept Erasure

首次提交 2026-11-07 02:18
版本更新 2026-11-07 02:18
雷达观测 2026-11-10 10:11
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Concept erasure, or concept unlearning, in text-to-image diffusion models is usually audited with prompt attacks. A prompt attack tests whether one conditioning string still retrieves the erased concept. It does not measure the probability that the frozen generator still assigns to that concept. We introduce least-action auditing of this residual probability, and evaluate it on Stable Diffusion concept-erasure checkpoints. The least-action barrier is the minimum control cost of driving the frozen reverse process into a detector-defined concept event. This cost equals the path-space KL divergence of conditioning the model on the event, and therefore the event's negative log-probability. The estimate $ΔS_{\mathrm{rob}}$ uses a CLIP$\wedge$DINOv2 consensus terminal, with no retraining and no adversarial prompt. Across $18$ erased concept-mechanism pairs spanning object classes and NSFW nudity, $ΔS_{\mathrm{rob}}$ predicts deployment leakage counted on $1{,}500$ fresh samples per model by detectors excluded from the audit (pooled Spearman $ρ{=}{-}0.76$, $p{=}5{\times}10^{-4}$). Within every audited concept, the eraser with the higher barrier leaks less ($18/18$). On NSFW nudity the barrier orders the standard erasers exactly: UCE $ΔS_{\mathrm{rob}}{=}3.9$ (leak $16.4\%$) $<$ ESD $75.5$ ($9.8\%$) $<$ RECE $224.5$ ($1.4\%$), while Safe Latent Diffusion (SLD) stays near zero and leaks $85.5\%$ under explicit prompts. The same trajectories repair deployed checkpoints. An audit-guided closed-form patch reduces UCE nudity leakage from $16.2\%$ to $0/1{,}500$ and RECE church leakage by $3.3\times$, where direction-count-matched random edits fail.

作者备注:22 pages, 12 figures

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-07 02:18 · 最新观测版本

Beyond Prompt Attacks: Least-Action Auditing of Concept Erasure

Concept erasure, or concept unlearning, in text-to-image diffusion models is usually audited with prompt attacks. A prompt attack tests whether one conditioning string still retrieves the erased concept. It does not measure the probability that the frozen generator still assigns to that concept. We introduce least-action auditing of this residual probability, and evaluate it on Stable Diffusion concept-erasure checkpoints. The least-action barrier is the minimum control cost of driving the frozen reverse process into a detector-defined concept event. This cost equals the path-space KL divergence of conditioning the model on the event, and therefore the event's negative log-probability. The estimate $ΔS_{\mathrm{rob}}$ uses a CLIP$\wedge$DINOv2 consensus terminal, with no retraining and no adversarial prompt. Across $18$ erased concept-mechanism pairs spanning object classes and NSFW nudity, $ΔS_{\mathrm{rob}}$ predicts deployment leakage counted on $1{,}500$ fresh samples per model by detectors excluded from the audit (pooled Spearman $ρ{=}{-}0.76$, $p{=}5{\times}10^{-4}$). Within every audited concept, the eraser with the higher barrier leaks less ($18/18$). On NSFW nudity the barrier orders the standard erasers exactly: UCE $ΔS_{\mathrm{rob}}{=}3.9$ (leak $16.4\%$) $<$ ESD $75.5$ ($9.8\%$) $<$ RECE $224.5$ ($1.4\%$), while Safe Latent Diffusion (SLD) stays near zero and leaks $85.5\%$ under explicit prompts. The same trajectories repair deployed checkpoints. An audit-guided closed-form patch reduces UCE nudity leakage from $16.2\%$ to $0/1{,}500$ and RECE church leakage by $3.3\times$, where direction-count-matched random edits fail.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗