Blackbox Model Provenance via Palimpsestic Membership Inference
Rohith Kuditipudi, Jing Huang, Sally Zhu, Diyi Yang, Christopher Potts, Percy Liang
Abstract
Suppose Alice trains an open-weight language model and Bob uses a blackbox derivative of Alice's model to produce text. Can Alice prove that Bob is using her model, either by querying Bob's derivative model (query setting) or from the text alone (observational setting)? We formulate this question as an independence testing problem-in which the null hypothesis is that Bob's model or text is independent of Alice's randomized training run-and investigate it through the lens of palimpsestic memorization in language models: models are more likely to memorize data seen later in training, so we can test whether Bob is using Alice's model using test statistics that capture correlation between Bob's model or text and the ordering of training examples in Alice's training run. If Alice has randomly shuffled her training data, then any significant correlation amounts to exactly quantifiable statistical evidence against the null hypothesis, regardless of the composition of Alice's training data. In the query setting, we directly estimate (via prompting) the likelihood Bob's model gives to Alice's training examples and their training order; we correlate the likelihoods of over 40 fine-tunes of various Pythia and OLMo base models ranging from 1B to 12B parameters with the base model's training data order, achieving a p-value on the order of at most 1 × 10 -8 in all but six cases. In the observational setting, we try two approaches based on estimating 1) the likelihood of Bob's text overlapping with spans of Alice's training examples and 2) the likelihood of Bob's text with respect to different versions of Alice's model we obtain by repeating the last phase (e.g., 1%) of her training run on reshuffled data. The second approach can reliably distinguish Bob's text from as little as a few hundred tokens; the first does not involve any retraining but requires many more tokens (several hundred thousand) to achieve high power.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 92b35a25-5add-46a4-b507-e9910381d1b0Builds on21
- Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and ScalingStella Biderman, Hailey Schoelkopf, Quentin Gregory Anthony, Herbie Bradley et al.ICML 2023 · 1,822 citations
- The Secret Sharer: Evaluating and Testing Unintended Memorization in Neural NetworksNicholas Carlini, Chang Liu, Úlfar Erlingsson, Jernej Kos et al.USENIX Security 2019 · 1,386 citations
- A Watermark for Large Language ModelsJohn Kirchenbauer, Jonas Geiping, Yuxin Wen, Jonathan Katz et al.ICML 2023 · 854 citations
- Memorization Without Overfitting: Analyzing the Training Dynamics of Large Language ModelsKushal Tirumala, Aram H. Markosyan, Luke Zettlemoyer, Armen AghajanyanNeurIPS 2022 · 304 citations
- Spotting LLMs With Binoculars: Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated TextAbhimanyu Hans, Avi Schwarzschild, Valeriia Cherepanova, Hamid Kazemi et al.ICML 2024 · 262 citations
Related papers
- Independence Tests for Language ModelsSally Zhu, Ahmed M. Ahmed, Rohith Kuditipudi, Percy LiangICML 2025
- Proving Test Set Contamination in Black-Box Language ModelsYonatan Oren, Nicole Meister, Niladri S. Chatterji, Faisal Ladhak et al.ICLR 2024 · 220 citations
- Causal Estimation of Memorisation ProfilesPietro Lesci, Clara Meister, Thomas Hofmann, Andreas Vlachos et al.ACL 2024 · 3 citations
- Detecting Data Contamination in LLMs via In-Context LearningMichal Zawalski, Meriem Boubdir, Klaudia Balazy, Besmira Nushi et al.ICLR 2026 · 8 citations
- PDR: A Plug-and-Play Positional Decay Framework for LLM Pre-training Data DetectionJinhan Liu, Yibo Yang, Ruiying Lu, Piotr Piekos et al.ACL 2026
