mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Authorship and the Politics and Ethics of LLM Watermarks

arXiv 2403.06593 ↗First posted 11 Mar 2024cs.CYcited by 2

On the map: LLM safety and security → Watermarking generated content and models

Abstract (arXiv)

Recently, watermarking schemes for large language models (LLMs) have been proposed to distinguish text generated by machines and by humans. The present paper explores philosophical, political, and ethical ramifications of implementing and using watermarking schemes. A definition of authorship that includes both machines (LLMs) and humans is proposed to serve as a backdrop. It is argued that private watermarks may provide private companies with sweeping rights to determine authorship, which is incompatible with traditional standards of authorship determination. Then, possible ramifications of the so-called entropy dependence of watermarking mechanisms are explored. It is argued that entropy may vary for different, socially salient groups. This could lead to group dependent rates at which machine generated text is detected. Specifically, groups more interested in low entropy text may face the challenge that it is harder to detect machine generated text that is of interest to them.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Watermarking generated content and models, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. First posted on arXiv 11 Mar 2024.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

2 papers.