Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2409.15781

Training Data Attribution: Was Your Model Secretly Trained On Data Created By Mine?

Abstract

The emergence of text-to-image models has recently sparked significant interest, but the attendant is a looming shadow of potential infringement by violating the user terms. Specifically, an adversary may exploit data created by a commercial model to train their own without proper authorization. To address such risk, it is crucial to investigate the attribution of a suspicious model's training data by determining whether its training data originates, wholly or partially, from a specific source model. To trace the generated data, existing methods require applying extra watermarks during either the training or inference phases of the source model. However, these methods are impractical for pre-trained models that have been released, especially when model owners lack security expertise. To tackle this challenge, we propose an injection-free training data attribution method for text-to-image models. It can identify whether a suspicious model's training data stems from a source model, without additional modifications on the source model. The crux of our method lies in the inherent memorization characteristic of text-to-image models. Our core insight is that the memorization of the training dataset is passed down through the data generated by the source model to the model trained on that data, making the source model and the infringing model exhibit consistent behaviors on specific samples. Therefore, our approach involves developing algorithms to uncover these distinct samples and using them as inherent watermarks to verify if a suspicious model originates from the source model. Our experiments demonstrate that our method achieves an accuracy of over 80\% in identifying the source of a suspicious model's training data, without interfering the original training or generation process of the source model.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Likun Zhang, Hao Wu, Lingcui Zhang, Fengyuan Xu, Jin Cao, Fenghua Li, Ben Niu. 2024-09-24. Training Data Attribution: Was Your Model Secretly Trained On Data Created By Mine?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.15781

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Privacy Leakage on DNNs: A Survey of Model Inversion Attacks and Defenses

Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) have revolutionized various domains with their exceptional performance across numerous applications. However, Model Inversion (MI) attacks, which disclose private information about the training dataset by abusing access to the trained models, have emerged as a formidable privacy threat. Given a trained network, these attacks enable adversaries to reconstruct high-fidelity data that closely aligns with the private training samples, posing significant privacy concerns. Despite the rapid advances in the field, we lack a comprehensive and systematic overview of existing MI attacks and defenses. To fill this gap, this paper thoroughly investigates this realm and presents a holistic survey. Firstly, our work briefly reviews early MI studies on traditional machine learning scenarios. We then elaborately analyze and compare numerous recent attacks and defenses on Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) across multiple modalities and learning tasks. By meticulously analyzing their distinctive features, we summarize and classify these methods into different categories and provide a novel taxonomy. Finally, this paper discusses promising research directions and presents potential solutions to open issues. To facilitate further study on MI attacks and defenses, we have implemented an open-source model inversion toolbox on GitHub (https://github.com/ffhibnese/Model-Inversion-Attack-ToolBox).

cs.CV

ALINA: Advanced Line Identification and Notation Algorithm

Labels are the cornerstone of supervised machine learning algorithms. Most visual recognition methods are fully supervised, using bounding boxes or pixel-wise segmentations for object localization. Traditional labeling methods, such as crowd-sourcing, are prohibitive due to cost, data privacy, amount of time, and potential errors on large datasets. To address these issues, we propose a novel annotation framework, Advanced Line Identification and Notation Algorithm (ALINA), which can be used for labeling taxiway datasets that consist of different camera perspectives and variable weather attributes (sunny and cloudy). Additionally, the CIRCular threshoLd pixEl Discovery And Traversal (CIRCLEDAT) algorithm has been proposed, which is an integral step in determining the pixels corresponding to taxiway line markings. Once the pixels are identified, ALINA generates corresponding pixel coordinate annotations on the frame. Using this approach, 60,249 frames from the taxiway dataset, AssistTaxi have been labeled. To evaluate the performance, a context-based edge map (CBEM) set was generated manually based on edge features and connectivity. The detection rate after testing the annotated labels with the CBEM set was recorded as 98.45%, attesting its dependability and effectiveness.

cs.CV

DisasterInsight: A Building-Centric Benchmark for Evaluating Vision--Language Models in Disaster Response

Vision--language models (VLMs) show promise for disaster-response remote sensing, but existing benchmarks mainly emphasize scene-level or damage-centric assessment. To study this building-centric gap, we introduce \method{}, a diagnostic benchmark built on xBD, a pre/post-disaster satellite dataset with building-level damage labels. \method{} enriches building instances with OpenStreetMap-derived functional labels and contains 134{,}108 task-specific instruction records across 15 task types, spanning instance-level assessment, scene-level counting, multi-instance reasoning, and structured report generation. The benchmark supports RGB pre/post-disaster imagery, single- and multi-view instance formulations, and scene-level RGB/SAR diagnostic inputs. Experiments with general-domain and remote-sensing VLMs show that models perform better on visible damage cues than on building-function understanding, multi-instance reasoning, counting, and grounded reporting. Instruction tuning improves performance on several tasks but does not close this building-centric gap.

cs.CV