Machine unlearning aims to remove “forget” data while preserving knowledge from the “retain” data, yet a fundamental question arises when the two share content. By definition, an unlearned model should be indistinguishable from a model retrained solely on the retain set, which implies that shared knowledge must remain while only forget-specific content is removed. To evaluate this requirement, we introduce DUSK, the first benchmark for unlearning under realistic knowledge overlap. DUSK constructs documents containing both shared and unique knowledge and defines seven metrics to test whether methods erase forget-specific expressions without discarding shared facts. Evaluating nine recent approaches, we find that although surface text is often removed, current methods struggle to distinguish shared from unique knowledge, either erasing information that should be retained or failing to fully forget target content. DUSK provides a controlled, reproducible testbed for diagnosing these failures and guiding precise unlearning algorithms.

Vision-language models are increasingly used as reward functions for robotic learning, but this role requires paraphrase invariance: the same trajectory should receive the same reward under semantically equivalent goal descriptions. We show that current VLM reward models often violate this property. Paraphrasing the instruction alone can substantially change predicted progress scores, and can even flip identical robot behavior between failure and success. To measure this failure mode, we introduce ROBORMBENCH, a benchmark with 2,390 real-robot trajectories, ground-truth progress labels, and 21,673 verified paraphrases spanning lexical, syntactic, and action-goal rewrites. Across proprietary and open-source VLMs, paraphrase-induced instability is widespread and severe, grows under more divergent rewrites, and is not reliably reduced by scale or explicit reasoning. Dedicated reward models trained with trajectory-grounded supervision are substantially more stable. These results show that paraphrase robustness is a core requirement for reliable VLM-based reward modeling in robotics.

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly store user preferences in persistent memory to support personalization across interactions. However, in third-party communication settings governed by social and institutional norms, some user preferences may be inappropriate to apply. We introduce BenchPreS, which evaluates whether memory-based user preferences are appropriately applied or suppressed across communication contexts. Using two complementary metrics, Misapplication Rate (MR) and Appropriate Application Rate (AAR), we find even frontier LLMs struggle to apply preferences in a context-sensitive manner. Models with stronger preference adherence exhibit higher rates of over-application, and neither reasoning capability nor selectivity-oriented prompting fully resolve this issue. These results suggest that current LLMs treat preferences as globally enforceable rules rather than as context-dependent normative signals.