MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387682100 · doi:10.1109/tkde.2023.3324932

A Robust Database Watermarking Scheme That Preserves Statistical Characteristics

2023· article· en· W4387682100 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceDigital watermarkingScheme (mathematics)Robustness (evolution)Data miningDatabaseArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Database watermarking can be used for copyright verification and leakage traceability, effectively protecting the security of the database. However, the existing watermarking schemes commonly embed watermarks by modifying the original data, which changes the statistical characteristics and affects the statistical analysis of the database. Therefore, this paper proposes SCPW, a <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">S</b> tatistical <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">C</b> haracteristics <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">P</b> reserving robust database <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">W</b> atermarking framework. First, we perform a theoretical analysis and propose a data modification scheme maintaining the statistical characteristics unchanged. Then, we establish the correspondence between the data and the watermarks that need to be embedded in it by grouping. Finally, the watermark message is embedded into the database through data verification and modification. Specifically, for data that needs to be watermarked, we first verify whether the potential watermark bits extracted from the data are the same as bits that need to be embedded. If they are the same, we regard this original data, usually a floating point number, as a “good number” and do not modify it. Otherwise, we modify the data until it becomes a “good number” using a data modification scheme that preserves the statistical characteristics proposed by the theoretical analysis. In addition, we also use the genetic algorithm to optimize the grouping results and increase the proportion of “good number”, thereby reducing the proportion of data that needs to be modified and further reducing distortion. To our best knowledge, SCPW is the first watermarking scheme that ensures the preservation of statistical characteristics, and the experimental results also prove its excellent ability to preserve statistical characteristics compared to existing schemes. Moreover, experiments also illustrate that our method is robust against a wide range of attacks. When under deletion attack (deletion rate = 90%), the bit error rate of watermark extraction is only 0.8%, which is more than 12% lower than the current best method.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it