mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Enhancing Training Data Attribution for Large Language Models with Fitting Error Consideration

arXiv 2410.01285 ↗First posted 2 Oct 2024cs.CLcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The black-box nature of large language models (LLMs) poses challenges in interpreting results, impacting issues such as data intellectual property protection and hallucination tracing. Training data attribution (TDA) methods are considered effective solutions to address these challenges. Most recent TDA methods rely on influence functions, assuming the model achieves minimized empirical risk. However, achieving this criterion is difficult, and sourcing accuracy can be compromised by fitting errors during model training. In this paper, we introduce a novel TDA method called Debias and Denoise Attribution (DDA), which enhances influence functions by addressing fitting errors. Specifically, the debias strategy seeks to improve the performance of influence functions by eliminating the knowledge bias present in the base model before fine-tuning, while the denoise strategy aims to reduce discrepancies in influence scores arising from varying degrees of fitting during the training process through smoothing techniques. Experimental results demonstrate that our method significantly outperforms existing approaches, achieving an averaged AUC of 91.64%. Moreover, DDA exhibits strong generality and scalability across various sources and different-scale models like LLaMA2, QWEN2, and Mistral.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Oct 2024.

Builds on

22 of 43 references.

References · 22

  1. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  2. 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,411
  3. 2017Understanding Black-box Predictions via Influence Functionscited by 1,714
  4. 2018Don't Give Me the Details, Just the Summary! Topic-Aware Convolutional Neural Networks for Extreme Summarizationcited by 1,308
  5. 2020Estimating Training Data Influence by Tracing Gradient Descentcited by 565
  6. 2023Trustworthy LLMs: a Survey and Guideline for Evaluating Large Language Models' Alignmentcited by 394
  7. 2023Can AI-Generated Text be Reliably Detected?cited by 372
  8. 2023Explainability for Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 331
  9. 2023Studying Large Language Model Generalization with Influence Functionscited by 311
  10. 2023TRAK: Attributing Model Behavior at Scalecited by 273
  11. 2018Representer Point Selection for Explaining Deep Neural Networkscited by 187
  12. 2022If Influence Functions are the Answer, Then What is the Question?cited by 142
10 more
  1. 2024Risk Taxonomy, Mitigation, and Assessment Benchmarks of Large Language Model Systemscited by 63
  2. 2023Mark My Words: Analyzing and Evaluating Language Model Watermarkscited by 62
  3. 2024No Free Lunch in LLM Watermarking: Trade-offs in Watermarking Design Choicescited by 47
  4. 2023Evaluating Data Attribution for Text-to-Image Modelscited by 45
  5. 2021An Empirical Comparison of Instance Attribution Methods for NLPcited by 35
  6. 2022Contrastive Error Attribution for Finetuned Language Modelscited by 12
  7. 2023MacLaSa: Multi-Aspect Controllable Text Generation via Efficient Sampling from Compact Latent Spacecited by 12
  8. 2023Source Attribution for Large Language Model-Generated Datacited by 11
  9. 2023Influence Scores at Scale for Efficient Language Data Samplingcited by 5
  10. 2023Cross-Model Comparative Loss for Enhancing Neuronal Utility in Language Understandingcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 5; 2026: 1.

6 papers.