Data Authenticity, Consent, & Provenance for AI are all broken: what will it take to fix them?
Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:KC6YGNX6record.jsonopen to challenge →
read the original abstract
New capabilities in foundation models are owed in large part to massive, widely-sourced, and under-documented training data collections. Existing practices in data collection have led to challenges in tracing authenticity, verifying consent, preserving privacy, addressing representation and bias, respecting copyright, and overall developing ethical and trustworthy foundation models. In response, regulation is emphasizing the need for training data transparency to understand foundation models' limitations. Based on a large-scale analysis of the foundation model training data landscape and existing solutions, we identify the missing infrastructure to facilitate responsible foundation model development practices. We examine the current shortcomings of common tools for tracing data authenticity, consent, and documentation, and outline how policymakers, developers, and data creators can facilitate responsible foundation model development by adopting universal data provenance standards.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
A governance horizon for ethical-use constraints in open-weight AI models
Ethical constraint evidence on open-weight AI models decays with a half-life of 1.31 derivation steps on Hugging Face, creating a governance horizon at seven generations where 80% of models lack traceable information.
-
AdaQE-CG: Adaptive Query Expansion for Web-Scale Generative AI Model and Data Card Generation
AdaQE-CG uses context-aware adaptive query expansion and inter-card knowledge transfer from a MetaGAI Pool to generate higher-quality model and data cards than prior methods, validated on the new expert-annotated Meta...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.