Auditing Data Provenance in LLM Fine-tuning via Intrinsic Distributional Fingerprints
On the map: Knowledge distillation → Federated, robust and private distillation
Abstract (arXiv)
The proliferation of customized Large Language Models (LLMs) poses critical risks of Data Intellectual Property (Data IP) infringement via unauthorized fine-tuning on proprietary data. Existing audit techniques are limited, as they require intervention during data preparation or training and remain fragile under malicious obfuscations such as data paraphrasing and knowledge distillation. We propose textitDistribution Provenance Audit (DPA), a post-hoc framework for auditing data IP infringement in LLM fine-tuning under black-box and malicious settings. DPA is grounded in a critical insight: regardless of fine-tuning tactics to evade provenance, the practical necessity of maintaining utility constrains the model to preserve the fundamental intersection of semantic substance and lexical form. Accordingly, DPA captures this persistent lexical-semantic intersection as intrinsic distributional fingerprints. The framework formulates the audit as a statistical hypothesis test, effectively quantifying these fingerprints via unbiased output sampling to reliably reject the null hypothesis of non-usage. Extensive experiments on medical and legal fine-tuning tasks show that DPA consistently outperforms existing baselines, remaining robust against adversarial trainers employing paraphrasing and knowledge distillation. We further highlight a fundamental dual-use tension: the same high-fidelity distributional fingerprints enabling reliable auditing may also facilitate privacy attacks.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Federated, robust and private distillation, one of 12 directions in Knowledge distillation. Builds on 25 of its 50 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Aug 2026.
Builds on
25 of 50 references.
References · 25
- 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
- 2025Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilitiescited by 3,796
- 2016Deep Learning with Differential Privacycited by 2,728
- 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,189
- 2017Decoupled Weight Decay Regularizationcited by 1,831
- 2024Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning for Large Models: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 656
- 2021MAUVE: Measuring the Gap Between Neural Text and Human Text using Divergence Frontierscited by 470
- 2023ChatDoctor: A Medical Chat Model Fine-Tuned on a Large Language Model Meta-AI (LLaMA) Using Medical Domain Knowledgecited by 325
- 2023MedAlpaca -- An Open-Source Collection of Medical Conversational AI Models and Training Datacited by 286
- 2023Analyzing Leakage of Personally Identifiable Information in Language Modelscited by 285
- 2023Text Embeddings Reveal (Almost) As Much As Textcited by 192
13 more
- 2021Towards Understanding Knowledge Distillationcited by 158
- 2020Learning Deep Kernels for Non-Parametric Two-Sample Testscited by 130
- 2016Learning in Implicit Generative Modelscited by 125
- 2024SoK: Membership Inference Attacks on LLMs are Rushing Nowhere (and How to Fix It)cited by 59
- 2022Describing Differences between Text Distributions with Natural Languagecited by 54
- 2024Membership Inference Attacks Cannot Prove that a Model Was Trained On Your Datacited by 50
- 2023Did You Train on My Dataset? Towards Public Dataset Protection with Clean-Label Backdoor Watermarkingcited by 37
- 2014Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile rangecited by 17
- 2024Range Membership Inference Attackscited by 12
- 2025Is My Text in Your AI Model? Gradient-based Membership Inference Test applied to LLMscited by 10
- 2025Can We Infer Confidential Properties of Training Data from LLMs?cited by 4
- 2025Data Provenance Auditing of Fine-Tuned Large Language Models with a Text-Preserving Techniquecited by 4
- 2025Verifiable Fine-Tuning for LLMs: Zero-Knowledge Training Proofs Bound to Data Provenance and Policycited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Tracing the Data Trail: A Survey of Data Provenance, Transparency and Traceability in LLMs
- 2026A Behavioral Fingerprint for Large Language Models: Provenance Tracking via Refusal Vectors
- 2025SoK: Large Language Model Copyright Auditing via Fingerprinting
- 2026PARSE: Provenance-Aware Retrieval Sanitization for Professional Domain LLM Agents
- 2026On the Evidentiary Limits of Membership Inference for Copyright Auditing
- 2025Synthetic Artifact Auditing: Tracing LLM-Generated Synthetic Data Usage in Downstream Applications
- 2024Generated Data with Fake Privacy: Hidden Dangers of Fine-tuning Large Language Models on Generated Data
- 2026Origin Is All You Need: Provenance-Aware Transformers for Structural Trust-Boundary Separation