Tool Unlearning for Tool-Augmented LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.01083v1
• Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2025 05:50:55 GMT
• Title: Tool Unlearning for Tool-Augmented LLMs
• Authors: Jiali Cheng, Hadi Amiri,
• Abstract summary: Tool-augmented large language models (LLMs) are often trained on datasets of query-response pairs. ToolDelete is the first approach for unlearning tools from tool-augmented LLMs.
• Score: 14.755831733659699
• License:
• Abstract: Tool-augmented large language models (LLMs) are often trained on datasets of query-response pairs, which embed the ability to use tools or APIs directly into the parametric knowledge of LLMs. Tool-augmented LLMs need the ability to forget learned tools due to security vulnerabilities, privacy regulations, or tool deprecations. However, ``tool unlearning'' has not been investigated in unlearning literature. We introduce this novel task, which requires addressing distinct challenges compared to traditional unlearning: knowledge removal rather than forgetting individual samples, the high cost of optimizing LLMs, and the need for principled evaluation metrics. To bridge these gaps, we propose ToolDelete, the first approach for unlearning tools from tool-augmented LLMs. It implements three key properties to address the above challenges for effective tool unlearning and introduces a new membership inference attack (MIA) model for effective evaluation. Extensive experiments on multiple tool learning datasets and tool-augmented LLMs show that ToolDelete effectively unlearns randomly selected tools, while preserving the LLM's knowledge on non-deleted tools and maintaining performance on general tasks.

Related papers

• Self-Training Large Language Models for Tool-Use Without Demonstrations [15.17750971071501]
  Large language models (LLMs) remain prone to factual inaccuracies and computational errors. Recent work augmented LLMs with tools to mitigate these shortcomings, but often requires curated gold tool-use demonstrations. This paper investigates whether LLMs can learn to use tools without demonstrations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-09T12:06:10Z)
• PTR: Precision-Driven Tool Recommendation for Large Language Models [43.53494041932615]
  We propose a Precision-driven Tool Recommendation (PTR) approach for Large Language Models (LLMs) PTR captures an initial, concise set of tools by leveraging historical tool bundle usage and dynamically adjusts the tool set by performing tool matching. We present a new dataset, RecTools, and a metric, TRACC, designed to evaluate the effectiveness of tool recommendation for LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-14T17:33:36Z)
• Learning to Ask: When LLM Agents Meet Unclear Instruction [55.65312637965779]
  Large language models (LLMs) can leverage external tools for addressing a range of tasks unattainable through language skills alone. We evaluate the performance of LLMs tool-use under imperfect instructions, analyze the error patterns, and build a challenging tool-use benchmark called Noisy ToolBench. We propose a novel framework, Ask-when-Needed (AwN), which prompts LLMs to ask questions to users whenever they encounter obstacles due to unclear instructions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-31T23:06:12Z)
• WTU-EVAL: A Whether-or-Not Tool Usage Evaluation Benchmark for Large Language Models [31.742620965039517]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in NLP tasks, but still need external tools to extend their ability. We introduce the Whether-or-not tool usage Evaluation benchmark (WTU-Eval) to assess LLMs with eleven datasets. The results of eight LLMs on WTU-Eval reveal that LLMs frequently struggle to determine tool use in general datasets. Fine-tuning Llama2-7B results in a 14% average performance improvement and a 16.8% decrease in incorrect tool usage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T12:07:38Z)
• Chain of Tools: Large Language Model is an Automatic Multi-tool Learner [54.992464510992605]
  Automatic Tool Chain (ATC) is a framework that enables the large language models (LLMs) to act as a multi-tool user. To scale up the scope of the tools, we next propose a black-box probing method. For a comprehensive evaluation, we build a challenging benchmark named ToolFlow.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-26T11:40:58Z)
• LLMs in the Imaginarium: Tool Learning through Simulated Trial and Error [54.954211216847135]
  Existing large language models (LLMs) only reach a correctness rate in the range of 30% to 60%. We propose a biologically inspired method for tool-augmented LLMs, simulated trial and error (STE) STE orchestrates three key mechanisms for successful tool use behaviors in the biological system: trial and error, imagination, and memory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-07T18:50:51Z)
• Efficient Tool Use with Chain-of-Abstraction Reasoning [63.08202389132155]
  Large language models (LLMs) need to ground their reasoning to real-world knowledge. There remains challenges for fine-tuning LLM agents to invoke tools in multi-step reasoning problems. We propose a new method for LLMs to better leverage tools in multi-step reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-30T21:53:30Z)
• ToolEyes: Fine-Grained Evaluation for Tool Learning Capabilities of Large Language Models in Real-world Scenarios [49.33633818046644]
  We propose ToolEyes, a fine-grained system tailored for the evaluation of large language models' tool learning capabilities in authentic scenarios. The system meticulously examines seven real-world scenarios, analyzing five dimensions crucial to LLMs in tool learning. ToolEyes incorporates a tool library boasting approximately 600 tools, serving as an intermediary between LLMs and the physical world.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-01T12:49:36Z)
• MetaTool Benchmark for Large Language Models: Deciding Whether to Use Tools and Which to Use [79.87054552116443]
  Large language models (LLMs) have garnered significant attention due to their impressive natural language processing (NLP) capabilities. We introduce MetaTool, a benchmark designed to evaluate whether LLMs have tool usage awareness and can correctly choose tools. We conduct experiments involving eight popular LLMs and find that the majority of them still struggle to effectively select tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-04T19:39:26Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.