Perceptual Hashing of Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Model Copy Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, many model intellectual property (IP) proof methods for IP protection have been proposed, such as model watermarking and model fingerprinting. However, with the increasing number of models transmitted and deployed on the Internet, quickly finding the suspect model among thousands of models on model-sharing platforms such as GitHub is in great demand, which concurrently triggers the new security problem of model copy detection for IP protection. As an important part of the model IP protection system, the model copy detection task has not received enough attention. Due to the high computational complexity, both model watermarking and model fingerprinting lack the capability to efficiently find suspected infringing models among tens of millions of models. In this article, inspired by the hash-based image retrieval methods, we introduce a novel model copy detection mechanism: perceptual hashing for convolutional neural networks (CNNs). The proposed perceptual hashing algorithm can convert the weights of CNNs to fixed-length binary hash codes so that the lightly modified version has the similar hash code as the original model. By comparing the similarity of a pair of hash codes between a query model and a test model in the model library, similar versions of a query model can be retrieved efficiently. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first perceptual hashing algorithm for deep neural network models. Specifically, we first select the important model weights based on the model compression theory, then calculate the normal test statistics (NTS) on the segments of important weights, and finally encode the NTS features into hash codes. The experiment performed on a model library containing 3,565 models indicates that our perceptual hashing scheme has a superior copy detection performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".