mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Watermarking LLM-Generated Datasets in Downstream Tasks

arXiv 2506.13494 ↗First posted 16 Jun 2025cs.CRcited by 1

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) have experienced rapid advancements, with applications spanning a wide range of fields, including sentiment classification, review generation, and question answering. Due to their efficiency and versatility, researchers and companies increasingly employ LLM-generated data to train their models. However, the inability to track content produced by LLMs poses a significant challenge, potentially leading to copyright infringement for the LLM owners. In this paper, we propose a method for injecting watermarks into LLM-generated datasets, enabling the tracking of downstream tasks to detect whether these datasets were produced using the original LLM. These downstream tasks can be divided into two categories. The first involves using the generated datasets at the input level, commonly for training classification tasks. The other is the output level, where model trainers use LLM-generated content as output for downstream tasks, such as question-answering tasks. We design a comprehensive set of experiments to evaluate both watermark methods. Our results indicate the high effectiveness of our watermark approach. Additionally, regarding model utility, we find that classifiers trained on the generated datasets achieve a test accuracy exceeding 0.900 in many cases, suggesting that the utility of such models remains robust. For the output-level watermark, we observe that the quality of the generated text is comparable to that produced using real-world datasets. Through our research, we aim to advance the protection of LLM copyrights, taking a significant step forward in safeguarding intellectual property in this domain.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Watermarking generated content and models, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 45 of its 55 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Jun 2025.

Builds on

45 of 55 references.

Closest ancestors · 9

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Watermark Stealing in Large Language Models29 Feb
  2. 2023A Robust Semantics-based Watermark for Large Language Model against Paraphrasing15 Nov
  3. 2023A Semantic Invariant Robust Watermark for Large Language Models10 Oct
  4. 2023Provable Robust Watermarking for AI-Generated Text30 Jun
  5. 2023On the Reliability of Watermarks for Large Language Models7 Jun
  6. 2023Who Wrote this Code? Watermarking for Code Generation24 May
  7. 2023Watermarking Diffusion Model21 May
  8. 2023Are You Copying My Model? Protecting the Copyright of Large Language Models for EaaS via Backdoor Watermark17 May
  9. 2023A Watermark for Large Language Models24 Jan

Other references · 36

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  2. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
  3. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,599
  4. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
  5. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
  6. 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,944
  7. 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
  8. 2023Improved Baselines with Visual Instruction Tuningcited by 4,418
  9. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,374
  10. 2023MiniGPT-4: Enhancing Vision-Language Understanding with Advanced Large Language Modelscited by 2,711
  11. 2015Character-level Convolutional Networks for Text Classificationcited by 2,330
  12. 2024Qwen2 Technical Reportcited by 2,120
24 more
  1. 2022Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineerscited by 1,045
  2. 2017To prune, or not to prune: exploring the efficacy of pruning for model compressioncited by 603
  3. 2018Fine-Pruning: Defending Against Backdooring Attacks on Deep Neural Networkscited by 580
  4. 2021MAUVE: Measuring the Gap Between Neural Text and Human Text using Divergence Frontierscited by 470
  5. 2018Turning Your Weakness Into a Strength: Watermarking Deep Neural Networks by Backdooringcited by 357
  6. 2023Benchmarking Large Language Models in Retrieval-Augmented Generationcited by 312
  7. 2017Embedding Watermarks into Deep Neural Networkscited by 248
  8. 2020BadNL: Backdoor Attacks against NLP Models with Semantic-preserving Improvementscited by 211
  9. 2021DialogSum: A Real-Life Scenario Dialogue Summarization Datasetcited by 183
  10. 2023What In-Context Learning "Learns" In-Context: Disentangling Task Recognition and Task Learningcited by 152
  11. 2020Entangled Watermarks as a Defense against Model Extractioncited by 149
  12. 2023Increasing Diversity While Maintaining Accuracy: Text Data Generation with Large Language Models and Human Interventionscited by 125
  13. 2017Adversarial Frontier Stitching for Remote Neural Network Watermarkingcited by 118
  14. 2024Mapping the Increasing Use of LLMs in Scientific Paperscited by 118
  15. 2023Synthetic Data Generation with Large Language Models for Text Classification: Potential and Limitationscited by 100
  16. 2021SoK: How Robust is Image Classification Deep Neural Network Watermarking? (Extended Version)cited by 69
  17. 2024Instruction Backdoor Attacks Against Customized LLMscited by 62
  18. 2021Protecting Intellectual Property of Generative Adversarial Networks from Ambiguity Attackcited by 46
  19. 2022SSLGuard: A Watermarking Scheme for Self-supervised Learning Pre-trained Encoderscited by 45
  20. 2019REFIT: A Unified Watermark Removal Framework For Deep Learning Systems With Limited Datacited by 44
  21. 2020Fine-tuning Is Not Enough: A Simple yet Effective Watermark Removal Attack for DNN Modelscited by 21
  22. 2023Backdoor Attacks Against Dataset Distillationcited by 21
  23. 2023Robustness Over Time: Understanding Adversarial Examples' Effectiveness on Longitudinal Versions of Large Language Modelscited by 7
  24. 2022Attention Distraction: Watermark Removal Through Continual Learning with Selective Forgettingcited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023From Text to Source: Results in Detecting Large Language Model-Generated Content
  2. 2023Unbiased Watermark for Large Language Models
  3. 2024Watermarking Large Language Models and the Generated Content: Opportunities and Challenges
  4. 2025EditMark: Watermarking Large Language Models based on Model Editing
  5. 2024Can Watermarking Large Language Models Prevent Copyrighted Text Generation and Hide Training Data?
  6. 2026Dataset Watermarking with Provable Black-Box Detection
  7. 2023Downstream Trade-offs of a Family of Text Watermarks
  8. 2025SoK: Are Watermarks in LLMs Ready for Deployment?