Robust Data Watermarking in Language Models by Injecting Fictitious Knowledge
On the map: LLM safety and security → Watermarking generated content and models
Abstract (arXiv)
Data watermarking in language models injects traceable signals, such as specific token sequences or stylistic patterns, into copyrighted text, allowing copyright holders to track and verify training data ownership. Previous data watermarking techniques primarily focus on effective memorization during pretraining, while overlooking challenges that arise in other stages of the LLM lifecycle, such as the risk of watermark filtering during data preprocessing and verification difficulties due to API-only access. To address these challenges, we propose a novel data watermarking approach that injects plausible yet fictitious knowledge into training data using generated passages describing a fictitious entity and its associated attributes. Our watermarks are designed to be memorized by the LLM through seamlessly integrating in its training data, making them harder to detect lexically during preprocessing. We demonstrate that our watermarks can be effectively memorized by LLMs, and that increasing our watermarks' density, length, and diversity of attributes strengthens their memorization. We further show that our watermarks remain effective after continual pretraining and supervised finetuning. Finally, we show that our data watermarks can be evaluated even under API-only access via question answering.
Key facts. Cited by 8 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. Builds on 27 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Mar 2025.
Builds on
27 of 38 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 26
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
- 2024Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of contextcited by 3,175
- 2017TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehensioncited by 2,895
- 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,221
- 2019Language Models as Knowledge Bases?cited by 1,922
- 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,734
- 2023The RefinedWeb Dataset for Falcon LLM: Outperforming Curated Corpora with Web Data, and Web Data Onlycited by 755
- 2021Deduplicating Training Data Makes Language Models Bettercited by 705
- 2024OLMo: Accelerating the Science of Language Modelscited by 599
- 2024Dolma: an Open Corpus of Three Trillion Tokens for Language Model Pretraining Researchcited by 475
- 2022Large Language Models Struggle to Learn Long-Tail Knowledgecited by 452
14 more
- 2020Label-Only Membership Inference Attackscited by 371
- 2023Physics of Language Models: Part 3.1, Knowledge Storage and Extractioncited by 264
- 2023Proving Test Set Contamination in Black Box Language Modelscited by 227
- 2019A backdoor attack against LSTM-based text classification systemscited by 214
- 2019Stolen Memories: Leveraging Model Memorization for Calibrated White-Box Membership Inferencecited by 168
- 2021Mind the Style of Text! Adversarial and Backdoor Attacks Based on Text Style Transfercited by 147
- 2023Privacy Auditing with One (1) Training Runcited by 119
- 2024LLM Dataset Inference: Did you train on my dataset?cited by 107
- 2021Backdoor Attacks on Pre-trained Models by Layerwise Weight Poisoningcited by 103
- 2023Low-Cost High-Power Membership Inference Attackscited by 99
- 2024How Do Large Language Models Acquire Factual Knowledge During Pretraining?cited by 86
- 2022Measuring Causal Effects of Data Statistics on Language Model's `Factual' Predictionscited by 57
- 2022How Pre-trained Language Models Capture Factual Knowledge? A Causal-Inspired Analysiscited by 42
- 2023Large Language Models Are Better Adversaries: Exploring Generative Clean-Label Backdoor Attacks Against Text Classifierscited by 14
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 5; 2026: 3.
8 papers.
- 2025Position: LLM Watermarking Should Align Stakeholders' Incentives for Practical Adoptioncited by 7
- 2025Large Language Model Sourcing: A Surveycited by 5
- 2025Data Provenance Auditing of Fine-Tuned Large Language Models with a Text-Preserving Techniquecited by 3
- 2025Every Language Model Has a Forgery-Resistant Signaturecited by 3
- 2025LexiMark: Robust Watermarking via Lexical Substitutions to Enhance Membership Verification of an LLM's Textual Training Datacited by 1
- 2026FedAttr: Towards Privacy-preserving Client-Level Attribution in Federated LLM Fine-tuningcited by 0
- 2026Dataset Watermarking with Provable Black-Box Detectioncited by 0
- 2026AEyeDE: An Attention-Based Attribution Framework for AI-Generated Text Detectioncited by 0
- 2026Dataset Watermarking with Provable Black-Box Detection7 May 2026
- 2026FedAttr: Towards Privacy-preserving Client-Level Attribution in Federated LLM Fine-tuning7 May 2026
- 2026AEyeDE: An Attention-Based Attribution Framework for AI-Generated Text Detection13 Apr 2026
- 2025Position: LLM Watermarking Should Align Stakeholders' Incentives for Practical Adoption21 Oct 2025
- 2025Every Language Model Has a Forgery-Resistant Signature15 Oct 2025
- 2025Large Language Model Sourcing: A Survey11 Oct 2025
- 2025Data Provenance Auditing of Fine-Tuned Large Language Models with a Text-Preserving Technique7 Oct 2025
- 2025LexiMark: Robust Watermarking via Lexical Substitutions to Enhance Membership Verification of an LLM's Textual Training Data17 Jun 2025