REVIEW 2 cited by
CopyBench: Measuring Literal and Non-Literal Reproduction of Copyright-Protected Text in Language Model Generation
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Evaluating the degree of reproduction of copyright-protected content by language models (LMs) is of significant interest to the AI and legal communities. Although both literal and non-literal similarities are considered by courts when assessing the degree of reproduction, prior research has focused only on literal similarities. To bridge this gap, we introduce CopyBench, a benchmark designed to measure both literal and non-literal copying in LM generations. Using copyrighted fiction books as text sources, we provide automatic evaluation protocols to assess literal and non-literal copying, balanced against the model utility in terms of the ability to recall facts from the copyrighted works and generate fluent completions. We find that, although literal copying is relatively rare, two types of non-literal copying -- event copying and character copying -- occur even in models as small as 7B parameters. Larger models demonstrate significantly more copying, with literal copying rates increasing from 0.2\% to 10.5\% and non-literal copying from 2.3\% to 5.9\% when comparing Llama3-8B and 70B models, respectively. We further evaluate the effectiveness of current strategies for mitigating copying and show that (1) training-time alignment can reduce literal copying but may increase non-literal copying, and (2) current inference-time mitigation methods primarily reduce literal but not non-literal copying.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
MATH-Perturb: Benchmarking LLMs' Math Reasoning Abilities against Hard Perturbations
Hard perturbations that change the required solution method cause 10-25% accuracy drops across 18 LLMs on MATH, revealing limits in reasoning robustness.
-
ISACL: Internal State Analyzer for Copyrighted Training Data Leakage
An MLP trained on LLM internal states predicts Rouge-L-defined literal copying leakage with high accuracy, but not paraphrase-level leakage.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.