生成模型水印取证:信息论视角

Watermark Forensics for Generative Models: An Information-Theoretic Perspective

精选理由

这篇论文用信息论精确测量了水印取样的代价:归属N个用户需要多少个token,提取载荷需要多少,并在GPT-2等模型上验证了理论预测。

AI 摘要

该论文从信息论角度研究生成模型水印的取证能力,包括归属用户、提取载荷和定位编辑幸存部分。定义信息轮廓ν(t)=I(S;X_t|X<t)并证明检测由分布距离决定,归属和提取由信息总量决定。主要定理给出统计无失真方案下归属N个用户需Θ(log N/h)个token(h为熵率),提取ℓ位载荷需Θ(ℓ/h)。在GPT-2、Pythia-410M、Qwen2.5上的实验验证了理论常数。

原文 · arXiv cs.LG

Watermark Forensics for Generative Models: An Information-Theoretic Perspective

A watermark in a generative model's output is usually asked only whether a text is machine-made. The same mark can do more: attribute it to the user who produced it, extract a hidden payload, or localize the part that survives editing. These form a forensic ladder, and we ask what each rung costs in the sample length $n$. One object organizes the answers. Let $S$ be the secret the mark carries (a user's identity or payload), and let the information profile $ν(t)=I(S;X_t\mid X_{<t})$ record how much the $t$-th token reveals about $S$ given the earlier ones. Its total mass pays for attribution and extraction; how that mass is spread pays for localization; and detection alone is paid for not by information but by presence, the distance from the marked to the unmarked distribution. The literature's two quality models, a mark subtle on every token and one that stamps a few tokens loudly, are two incomparable ways of capping this profile. Our main theorem settles the ladder's entropy column. For statistically distortion-free schemes, attributing a text to one of $N$ users costs $Θ(\log N/h)$ tokens over every stationary-ergodic source of entropy rate $h$, sharp to a $(1+o(1))$ factor: to our knowledge the first tight entropy-rate law for multi-user attribution (via exact alignment). The natural collision-counting analysis overcharges without bound; only a decoder thresholding each candidate by its own realized surprisal attains the rate while almost never implicating an innocent user. A matching converse makes the law two-sided, and extraction of an $\ell$-bit payload costs $Θ(\ell/h)$. Two gaps are real, not modeling artifacts: a $Θ(\log N)$-token window in which a text is provably machine-made yet unattributable, and a footprint-resolution uncertainty principle. Experiments on GPT-2, Pythia-410M, and Qwen2.5 recover the predicted constants.