mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Witness Overlap: Directional Provenance Inside Open-Weight Model Families

arXiv 2609.31784 ↗First posted 24 Sep 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Open-weight models are often released, fine-tuned, aligned, merged, and re-released, making provenance audits ask not only whether checkpoints are related, but also which checkpoint came first. Many existing model-provenance methods are designed for a base-known audit setting: given a victim or source model, they test whether a suspect model is related to it. Although these audits are framed as source-to-suspect tests, their underlying evidence is often symmetric, relying on representation similarity, weight similarity, behavioral fingerprints, or correlation statistics. Symmetric pairwise comparisons can detect relatedness, but they cannot by themselves orient relationship between checkpoints A and B. We therefore introduce a local geometric comparison: instead of comparing two checkpoints directly, we add a third same-family checkpoint as a witness and compare the geometry around each candidate endpoint. Direction is inferred by asking which candidate behaves more like a branching parent. Motivated by this idea, and by the empirically observed asymmetry between parent-anchored and child-anchored witness-overlap distributions, we propose Witness Overlap, a prompt-free, training-free white-box test for directional provenance. On 176 LLM checkpoints from 16 families, our one-witness test orients 95.3% of parent-child decisions using Frobenius cosine. We further evaluate root identification, sibling discrimination, generalizations to VLM and diffusion families, and chain-structured ordering. The signal is robust to weight noise and sparse pruning, with a proposed SVD weight reduction variant showing greater robustness than Frobenius cosine.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Sep 2026.

Builds on

16 of 21 references.

References · 16

  1. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
  2. 2019PubMedQA: A Dataset for Biomedical Research Question Answeringcited by 1,288
  3. 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,080
  4. 2023Enhancing Chat Language Models by Scaling High-quality Instructional Conversationscited by 839
  5. 2023TIES-Merging: Resolving Interference When Merging Modelscited by 818
  6. 2023An Empirical Study of Pre-Trained Model Reuse in the Hugging Face Deep Learning Model Registrycited by 47
  7. 2024REEF: Representation Encoding Fingerprints for Large Language Modelscited by 36
  8. 2025Model Provenance Testing for Large Language Modelscited by 15
  9. 2025LLM DNA: Tracing Model Evolution via Functional Representationscited by 15
  10. 2024Unsupervised Model Tree Heritage Recoverycited by 11
  11. 2025Blackbox Model Provenance via Palimpsestic Membership Inferencecited by 11
  12. 2025Independence Tests for Language Modelscited by 10
4 more
  1. 2024Neural Lineagecited by 9
  2. 2025HuggingGraph: Understanding the Supply Chain of LLM Ecosystemcited by 8
  3. 2025An Empirical Analysis of Machine Learning Model and Dataset Documentation, Supply Chain, and Licensing Challenges on Hugging Facecited by 6
  4. 2026AttnDiff: Attention-based Differential Fingerprinting for Large Language Modelscited by 4

Built on by

Not cited yet.