LLMs Can Leak Training Data But Do They Want To? A Propensity-Aware Evaluation of Memorization in LLMs

Hugging Face Daily Papers Papers

Summary

PropMe is a propensity-aware framework for evaluating LLM memorization, distinguishing between forced reproduction capabilities and natural propensity using SimpleTrace for deterministic attribution across open models and datasets.

Large language models can reproduce training data, but existing memorization evaluations mostly measure whether models can be forced to do so, rather than whether they do so under ordinary use. We introduce PropMe, a propensity-aware framework for memorization evaluation that contrasts prefix-based capability attacks with non-adversarial evaluations. We propose a metric transformation that, applied to existing functions, allows to create propensity metrics. We further introduce SimpleTrace, a lightweight tracing pipeline built on infini-gram that deterministically attributes model generations to large-scale training corpora and computes verbatim, near-verbatim, and propensity-transformed memorization metrics. Evaluating two fully-open models: Comma and DFM Decoder on two datasets: Common Pile and Dynaword in two languages, we find a consistent gap between capability and propensity: prefix attacks elicit substantially stronger memorization signals than generic or dataset-specific prompts, while propensity scores remain low overall. Thus, the models can reveal training data when directly elicited, but rarely do so in more common non-adversarial settings. We also find that DFM Decoder, which is continually pre-trained from Comma, exhibits reduced memorization and memorization propensity for Common Pile, confirming that memorization capability can decrease when later training emphasizes partially different data. Our results suggest, and we encourage, that memorization audits should report both worst-case extractability and ordinary leakage propensity in order to have a more comprehensive view of this phenomenon.
Original Article
View Cached Full Text

Cached at: 06/05/26, 10:07 AM

Paper page - LLMs Can Leak Training Data But Do They Want To? A Propensity-Aware Evaluation of Memorization in LLMs

Source: https://huggingface.co/papers/2606.06286

Abstract

PropMe framework evaluates language model memorization by distinguishing between forced reproduction capabilities and natural propensity, using SimpleTrace for deterministic attribution and propensity-transformed metrics across open models and datasets.

Large language models can reproduce training data, but existingmemorization evaluations mostly measure whether models can be forced to do so, rather than whether they do so under ordinary use. We introduce PropMe, apropensity-aware frameworkformemorization evaluationthat contrastsprefix-based capability attackswith non-adversarial evaluations. We propose ametric transformationthat, applied to existing functions, allows to create propensity metrics. We further introduce SimpleTrace, a lightweight tracing pipeline built on infini-gram that deterministically attributes model generations to large-scale training corpora and computes verbatim, near-verbatim, andpropensity-transformed memorizationmetrics. Evaluating two fully-open models: Comma and DFM Decoder on two datasets: Common Pile and Dynaword in two languages, we find a consistent gap between capability and propensity: prefix attacks elicit substantially stronger memorization signals than generic or dataset-specific prompts, while propensity scores remain low overall. Thus, the models can reveal training data when directly elicited, but rarely do so in more common non-adversarial settings. We also find that DFM Decoder, which is continually pre-trained from Comma, exhibits reduced memorization and memorization propensity for Common Pile, confirming that memorization capability can decrease when later training emphasizes partially different data. Our results suggest, and we encourage, that memorization audits should report bothworst-case extractabilityandordinary leakage propensityin order to have a more comprehensive view of this phenomenon.

View arXiv pageView PDFGitHub0Add to collection

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2606\.06286

Don’t have the latest CLI?curl \-LsSf https://hf\.co/cli/install\.sh \| bash

Models citing this paper0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2606.06286 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2606.06286 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2606.06286 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to acollectionto link it from this page.

Similar Articles

STALE: Can LLM Agents Know When Their Memories Are No Longer Valid?

Hugging Face Daily Papers

This paper identifies a critical failure mode in LLM agents where they fail to update personalized memories when new evidence conflicts with prior beliefs. It introduces the STALE benchmark and a three-dimensional probing framework, revealing that even the best models achieve only 55.2% accuracy, and proposes CUPMem as a prototype for robust memory revision.

LLMs and Memory Limitations - review my thoughts pls

Reddit r/ArtificialInteligence

An analysis of LLM memory limitations, arguing that true personal AI requires single-tenant weight customization which conflicts with current multi-tenant cloud economics, and highlighting open-weight models as the likely source of progress.

Evaluating LLMs as Human Surrogates in Controlled Experiments

arXiv cs.CL

This paper evaluates whether off-the-shelf LLMs can reliably simulate human responses in controlled behavioral experiments by comparing LLM-generated data with human survey responses on accuracy perception. The findings show that while LLMs capture directional effects and aggregate belief-updating patterns, they do not consistently match human-scale effect magnitudes, clarifying when synthetic LLM data can serve as behavioral proxies.