Mark My Words: Dangers of Watermarked Images in ImageNet
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The utilization of pre-trained networks, especially those trained on ImageNet, has become a common practice in Computer Vision. However, prior research has indicated that a significant number of images in the ImageNet dataset contain watermarks, making pre-trained networks susceptible to learning artifacts such as watermark patterns within their latent spaces. In this paper, we aim to assess the extent to which popular pre-trained architectures display such behavior and to determine which classes are most affected. Additionally, we examine the impact of watermarks on the extracted features. Contrary to the popular belief that the Chinese logographic watermarks impact the "carton" class only, our analysis reveals that a variety of ImageNet classes, such as "monitor", "broom", "apron" and "safe" rely on spurious correlations. Finally, we propose a simple approach to mitigate this issue in fine-tuned networks by ignoring the encodings from the feature-extractor layer of ImageNet pre-trained networks that are most susceptible to watermark imprints.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it