Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 62 references

Semantic Watermarking Reinvented: Enhancing Robustness and Generation Quality with Fourier Integrity

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that enforcing Hermitian symmetry when embedding semantic watermarks in the latent Fourier domain raises detection robustness and image quality together, and that the HSQR variant beats RingID on identification accuracy…

desk verdict SFW is a genuine fix for Fourier-domain semantic watermarks, but the random-crop numbers at scale 0.2 are internally inconsistent and need a second look before I'd trust the cropping claims. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.07647 v1 pith:QJQKHC2I submitted 2025-09-09 cs.CV

Sung Ju Lee , Nam Ik Cho This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords semanticwatermarkinglatentdiffusionmodelsFourierdomainHermitiansymmetrycroppingrobustnessQRcodewatermarkfrequencyintegritygenerationquality
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Existing semantic watermarks for latent diffusion models embed a pattern in the Fourier domain of the latent noise and then discard the imaginary part of the inverse transform, which the paper identifies as the cause of both weak detection and degraded image quality. The paper proposes Hermitian Symmetric Fourier Watermarking (SFW), which enforces the mirror symmetry a real latent requires so the full complex Fourier pattern survives, together with a center-aware embedding that applies the Fourier transform to only the central 44×44 of the 64×64 latent. Applied to the tree-ring pattern (HSTR) and to a new QR-code-based pattern (HSQR), the method claims state-of-the-art verification and identification accuracy across signal-processing, regeneration, and cropping attacks while improving FID and CLIP scores over prior semantic methods. If right, this means the robustness/fidelity trade-off in latent-domain watermarking is largely an artifact of broken frequency structure.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Hermitian symmetry condition on the discrete Fourier transform of the real latent, written as $F[M-k, N-l] = F[k,l]$, which guarantees that the inverse transform is real-valued so no imaginary information must be thrown away; the paper positions the pattern one pixel off the DC axis and zeroes the imaginary parts at DC and Nyquist frequencies. The second mechanism is center-aware embedding: the Fourier transform is applied only to the central $44 \times 44$ region of the $64 \times 64$ latent, so a crop-and-resize attack that keeps the image center retains the pattern. For HSQR, the QR code's error correction and a $2 \times 2$-pixel cell layout add redundancy that allows detection across nearly the full frequency spectrum.

What would settle it

Watermark an image with HSQR, crop out a corner region that excludes the original image center (for example the top-left 70% of the area), resize it back to $512 \times 512$, run DDIM inversion, and measure identification accuracy within the central $44 \times 44$ latent region; if accuracy drops well below the reported 0.955 at random-crop scale 0.2, the center-aware robustness claim holds only for centered crops. A second check: verify that the inverse-transformed watermarked latent has a vanishingly small imaginary component for SFW; if it does not, the frequency-integrity mechanism is not actually enforced.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the frequency loss caused by discarding the imaginary component after inverse Fourier transform—not the embedding pattern itself—limits both detection and generation quality in latent Fourier watermarking. Enforcing Hermitian symmetry, so that the modified spectrum still corresponds to a real-valued latent, preserves the information in both real and imaginary Fourier components and keeps the latent noise statistically close to a real Gaussian. With this constraint, the paper constructs HSTR (a symmetric tree-ring watermark) and HSQR (a QR code split across the real and imaginary parts of the free half-region) and reports that they outperform the strongest baseline RingID on identification accuracy (HSQR 0.985 vs 0.964 average on MS-COCO) and on FID (24.895 vs 27.052) while matching or exceeding its verification performance.

Load-bearing premise

The cropping-robustness results depend on the assumption that after a crop-and-resize attack the embedded pattern still sits in the same central $44 \times 44$ region of the latent with its alignment unchanged, so the $L^1$ distance comparison finds it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • HSTR and HSQR achieve state-of-the-art verification (TPR@1%FPR) and identification (Perfect Match Rate) across signal-processing, regeneration, and cropping attacks on MS-COCO, SD-Prompts, and DiffusionDB.
  • HSQR improves average identification accuracy to 0.985 versus RingID's 0.964 on MS-COCO, and improves FID from 27.052 to 24.895, so the previous trade-off between robustness and image quality is shifted.
  • Because SFW keeps the latent close to a real Gaussian, generation quality improves (better FID and CLIP, and higher MOS in the paper's human study) without any extra processing time since the watermark is merged in generation.
  • The finding that near-full-spectrum embedding works in latent space implies that the conventional low–mid frequency constraint, inherited from pixel-domain watermarking, does not apply to latent-domain semantic watermarking.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If frequency integrity is the real bottleneck, the same Hermitian-symmetry enforcement could be applied to other Fourier-domain watermarking schemes, including post-hoc ones like Zodiac, and should transfer to other generative models that operate on real-valued latents.
  • The result that full-spectrum QR encoding outperforms low-frequency ring patterns suggests that statistical redundancy (error-correcting codes, multi-pixel cells) matters more than frequency band choice in latent space; a direct extension would test this with other error-correcting structures.
  • The crop-robustness claims in the paper implicitly assume the watermark stays geometrically aligned in the central detection region after crop-and-resize; a natural extension is to estimate the crop offset from the detected pattern shift and realign before comparison, which could extend robustness to arbitrary off-center crops.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes Hermitian Symmetric Fourier Watermarking (SFW), a training-free modification for semantic watermarks embedded in the latent Fourier domain of diffusion models. SFW enforces Hermitian symmetry when constructing Fourier-domain patterns, avoiding the need to discard imaginary components during inverse transformation. The authors further propose a center-aware embedding strategy that embeds and detects watermarks only in the central 44×44 region of the 64×64 latent space. These ideas are instantiated in two methods: HSTR, an Hermitian-symmetric Tree-Ring variant, and HSQR, an Hermitian-symmetric QR-code watermark. The methods are evaluated on MS-COCO, SD-Prompts, and DiffusionDB with Stable Diffusion v2-1, under signal-processing, regeneration, and cropping attacks, with verification, identification, FID, and CLIP metrics. The central claim is that SFW simultaneously improves detection robustness and generation quality, and that center-aware embedding substantially improves cropping robustness.

Significance. If the results hold, this is a simple and practically useful contribution: it converts a known mathematical constraint (real-valued inverse DFT) into a concrete embedding rule, and it is applicable to existing semantic watermarking schemes without retraining. The paper has several genuine strengths. The four-case ablation in Tab. 4 isolates the effect of SFW and shows a clear detection gain (Case D vs Case A: average verification 0.971 vs 0.653). The HSQR amplitude Lambda is set from the Fourier-domain noise level rather than tuned on the headline metrics. The attack suite is broad, including learned compression, diffusion-based regeneration, and cropping, and the code is promised publicly. The main claims are falsifiable. The weaknesses that need attention are a mathematical typo in the central symmetry equation, an under-specified and internally suspicious random-crop protocol, and some overstatement in the verification comparison.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3.2, Eq. (1)] The stated Hermitian symmetry condition omits complex conjugation. It should read F[M-k,N-l] = conj(F[k,l]) (with the appropriate periodic-index convention, or F[-k,-l] = conj(F[k,l]) in shifted coordinates). As printed, the condition is not Hermitian symmetry and does not guarantee a real-valued inverse DFT. Because this equation is the mathematical foundation of the proposed method, it must be corrected.
  2. [Sec. 5.1, Sec. 5.3.2, Tab. 15, Fig. 5] The random-crop protocol is not defined precisely enough to support the cropping-robustness claims. The text states only that random crop (R.C.) is applied with a crop scale of 0.7, where the scale is the ratio of cropped area to original, but Fig. 5 and Tab. 15 report scales from 0.2 to 0.8 without specifying the offset distribution, whether crops are resized back to 512x512, how many random crops are used per image, or whether the reported scale is an area ratio or a linear ratio. More seriously, the reported numbers are internally difficult to reconcile: at scale 0.2, HSQR achieves 0.955 random-crop identification accuracy but only 0.555 center-crop accuracy, while HSTR shows the opposite ordering (0.489 vs 0.818). A uniformly random crop can displace the watermark outside the central detection region and should not be systematically easier than a center crop for a center-embedded watermark. Because the center-aware cropping claim in Sec. 5.3.2 and Tab. 8 depends on these comparisons, the authors must either specify the exact random-crop implementation, release the attack code, and explain the ordering, or remove and re-run the R.C. results.
  3. [Sec. 4.3.2, Eqs. (3)-(4)] The embedding and detection rules for HSQR are not fully reconciled. Eq. (3) writes signed magnitudes plus or minus |F(x,c)| of the original Fourier coefficient, while Eq. (4) defines the detection reference as a fixed-amplitude pattern plus or minus Lambda. The L1 distance between a query key region and a constant-amplitude template therefore includes the full magnitude fluctuation of the query, and the paper does not explain why this distance remains discriminative. In addition, replacing F_c by a signed half-normal variable changes the marginal distribution of the modified coefficient, so the Gaussianity-preservation discussion in Sec. 3.2 should be qualified for HSQR. A short derivation of the expected Delta-L1 statistic, or a statement that detection is performed on sign-normalized values, would remove this ambiguity.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract, Sec. 5.2, Tab. 1] The claim that the methods achieve state-of-the-art verification performance and surpass previous approaches is stronger than the reported numbers support. On average verification (TPR@1%FPR), HSQR ties RingID (0.997 vs 0.997 on MS-COCO) and HSTR is below RingID (0.971 vs 0.997). The paper should either soften the verification claim to competitive, with state-of-the-art identification, or provide a statistical test demonstrating superiority.
  2. [Sec. 5.1] The definition of crop scale is ambiguous across the paper. The main text says the scale is the ratio of cropped image area to original, but Fig. 5 and Tab. 15 use scales from 0.2 to 0.8 without restating this convention. Please state explicitly whether scale is an area ratio or a linear dimension ratio in every table and figure.
  3. [Tab. 1 and Tab. 2] The tables mix Bit Accuracy (for bitstream methods) with TPR@1%FPR (for semantic methods) in the same column. A footnote already explains this, but the cross-family comparisons should be explicitly flagged as not directly comparable so that readers do not interpret the numbers as apples-to-apples measurements.
  4. [Fig. 3 and Fig. 4] The figures contain unresolved LaTeX artifacts: Fig. 3 has the labels 'fig:wm-fft-a (lab4.py)' and 'fig:wm-fft-b (lab4.py)' above the caption, and Fig. 4 has 'fig:concept ???'. These should be cleaned before publication.
  5. [Sec. 5.3.3, Fig. 6] The text says accuracy declines as capacity increases for all methods, but RingID in Fig. 6 stays near 1.0 up to 2,048 keys and only degrades afterward. Please rephrase to describe the plateauing behavior accurately.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central mechanism is a standard mathematical constraint, the parameters are set from noise statistics or ablations, and all headline claims are empirical comparisons against external baselines.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained and empirically grounded. The core proposal, Hermitian Symmetric Fourier Watermarking (SFW), is the enforcement of the well-known Hermitian symmetry condition F[M-k,N-l] = conj(F[k,l]) required for an inverse DFT to yield a real signal; this is a mathematical fact stated explicitly in Eq. (1), not an assumption that presumes the paper's conclusions. The claim that existing baselines lose frequency integrity by discarding imaginary components is a direct, verifiable property of their pipelines. No predicted metric is defined in terms of a fitted constant: the HSQR encoding amplitude Lambda is set from the Fourier-domain standard deviation of a 64x64 Gaussian latent (Eq. (4) and Sec. 5.1), and the 44x44 center-aware region and 2x2 QR cell size are evaluated by ablations (Tab. 8, Fig. 5) rather than tuned to force the headline numbers. There are no self-citations carrying the load, no imported uniqueness theorems, and no ansatz smuggled in by citation; Tree-Ring, RingID, and Zodiac are cited as external prior works with their own stated protocols, and results are benchmarked against those baselines. The random-crop protocol is a potential validity concern, not a circularity: it affects whether the empirical cropping claim is trustworthy, not whether any derivation reduces to its inputs. Therefore the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a standard mathematical constraint (Hermitian symmetry), the Gaussian assumption for latent noise, and a small set of hand-chosen design parameters (central region size, QR cell size, amplitude). No new physical or conceptual entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Central latent region size = 44x44 of a 64x64 latent
    Chosen by hand in Sec. 4.2; the central 44x44 region is used for embedding. The choice is not derived and directly affects cropping robustness and watermark capacity.
  • QR cell pixel size = 2x2 pixels per QR cell
    Described in Sec. 4.3.2; each QR cell is tiled to multiple pixels for redundancy. The 2x2 choice is a design decision, ablated only indirectly through capacity experiments.
  • HSQR encoding amplitude Lambda = 45
    Set in Sec. 5.1 as approximately sqrt(64^2 / 2), matching the standard deviation of the real/imaginary Fourier components of a 64x64 normal latent. This is a principled scale choice rather than a fit to detection metrics.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math DFT of a real signal must satisfy Hermitian symmetry about DC (Eq. 1)
    The paper relies on this to enforce a real-valued inverse transform. Note the printed equation omits complex conjugation; the intended property is F[M-k,N-l] = conj(F[k,l]).
  • domain assumption Latent noise is real Gaussian, so its DFT is complex Gaussian with known scale
    Used in Eq. (2) and to set Lambda; realistic for Stable Diffusion's VAE prior but unverified per-image.
  • domain assumption DDIM inversion recovers the watermarked latent noise closely enough for key-region L1 matching
    The entire detection pipeline assumes the watermark pattern survives the generation-inversion cycle; this is the shared premise of semantic watermarking (Sec. 3.1).
  • ad hoc to paper Embedding only in the central spatial region improves cropping robustness
    Proposed in Sec. 4.2; the size of the region and the assumption that crops preserve the center are not derived from a model of the cropping attack.
  • domain assumption The 11 tested attacks are representative of real-world distortions
    Attack list in Sec. 5.1; no threat-model analysis or broader attack coverage is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Semantic Watermarking Reinvented: Enhancing Robustness and Generation Quality with Fourier Integrity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QJQKHC2I

@misc{pith2026250907647,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Semantic Watermarking Reinvented: Enhancing Robustness and Generation Quality with Fourier Integrity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QJQKHC2I}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.07647}
}
read the original abstract

Semantic watermarking techniques for latent diffusion models (LDMs) are robust against regeneration attacks, but often suffer from detection performance degradation due to the loss of frequency integrity. To tackle this problem, we propose a novel embedding method called Hermitian Symmetric Fourier Watermarking (SFW), which maintains frequency integrity by enforcing Hermitian symmetry. Additionally, we introduce a center-aware embedding strategy that reduces the vulnerability of semantic watermarking due to cropping attacks by ensuring robust information retention. To validate our approach, we apply these techniques to existing semantic watermarking schemes, enhancing their frequency-domain structures for better robustness and retrieval accuracy. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our methods achieve state-of-the-art verification and identification performance, surpassing previous approaches across various attack scenarios. Ablation studies confirm the impact of SFW on detection capabilities, the effectiveness of the center-aware embedding against cropping, and how message capacity influences identification accuracy. Notably, our method achieves the highest detection accuracy while maintaining superior image fidelity, as evidenced by FID and CLIP scores. Conclusively, our proposed SFW is shown to be an effective framework for balancing robustness and image fidelity, addressing the inherent trade-offs in semantic watermarking. Code available at https://github.com/thomas11809/SFWMark

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.07647 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Summary of watermarking performance across different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of the semantic watermarking process in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Examples of various semantic watermarking patterns. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Overview of the proposed framework and qualitative results. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Identification accuracy under center crop and random [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Identification accuracy across watermark message ca [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Taxonomy of watermarking methods evaluated in this [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Schematic illustration of the adapted identification pro [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Visual examples of all 11 attacks applied to a single [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: ROC curve for verification performance on MS-COCO under different attack scenarios. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: ROC curve for verification performance on SD-Prompts under different attack scenarios. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: ROC curve for verification performance on DiffusionDB under different attack scenarios. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Qualitative comparison of semantic watermarking methods following the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_13.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Redmark: Framework for resid- ual diffusion watermarking based on deep networks.Expert Systems with Applications, 146:113157, 2020

    Mahdi Ahmadi, Alireza Norouzi, Nader Karimi, Shadrokh Samavi, and Ali Emami. Redmark: Framework for resid- ual diffusion watermarking based on deep networks.Expert Systems with Applications, 146:113157, 2020. 1

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    A survey of frequency and wavelet domain digital watermarking techniques

    Dhruv Arya. A survey of frequency and wavelet domain digital watermarking techniques. 2

    work page

  3. [3]

    Promark: Proactive diffusion watermarking for causal attribution

    Vishal Asnani, John Collomosse, Tu Bui, Xiaoming Liu, and Shruti Agarwal. Promark: Proactive diffusion watermarking for causal attribution. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 10802–10811, 2024. 1, 2

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Variational image compression with a scale hyperprior.arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.01436,

    Johannes Ball ´e, David Minnen, Saurabh Singh, Sung Jin Hwang, and Nick Johnston. Variational image compression with a scale hyperprior.arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.01436,

    arXiv

  5. [5]

    A dct-domain system for robust image wa- termarking.Signal processing, 66(3):357–372, 1998

    Mauro Barni, Franco Bartolini, Vito Cappellini, and Alessandro Piva. A dct-domain system for robust image wa- termarking.Signal processing, 66(3):357–372, 1998. 1, 2

    work page 1998

  6. [6]

    Improved wavelet-based watermarking through pixel-wise masking.IEEE transactions on image processing, 10(5): 783–791, 2001

    Mauro Barni, Franco Bartolini, and Alessandro Piva. Improved wavelet-based watermarking through pixel-wise masking.IEEE transactions on image processing, 10(5): 783–791, 2001. 1, 2

    work page 2001

  7. [7]

    Rosteals: Robust steganography using autoencoder latent space

    Tu Bui, Shruti Agarwal, Ning Yu, and John Collomosse. Rosteals: Robust steganography using autoencoder latent space. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Com- puter Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 933–942, 2023. 1, 2

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Learned image compression with discretized gaussian mixture likelihoods and attention modules

    Zhengxue Cheng, Heming Sun, Masaru Takeuchi, and Jiro Katto. Learned image compression with discretized gaussian mixture likelihoods and attention modules. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 7939–7948, 2020. 6

    work page 2020

Show all 62 references
  1. [9]

    Reproducible scal- ing laws for contrastive language-image learning

    Mehdi Cherti, Romain Beaumont, Ross Wightman, Mitchell Wortsman, Gabriel Ilharco, Cade Gordon, Christoph Schuh- mann, Ludwig Schmidt, and Jenia Jitsev. Reproducible scal- ing laws for contrastive language-image learning. InPro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer V...

    2023

  2. [10]

    Wmadapter: Adding watermark control to latent dif- fusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.08337, 2024

    Hai Ci, Yiren Song, Pei Yang, Jinheng Xie, and Mike Zheng Shou. Wmadapter: Adding watermark control to latent dif- fusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.08337, 2024. 1, 2

    2024 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Ringid: Rethinking tree-ring watermarking for enhanced multi-key identification.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.14055,

    Hai Ci, Pei Yang, Yiren Song, and Mike Zheng Shou. Ringid: Rethinking tree-ring watermarking for enhanced multi-key identification.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.14055,

    arXiv

  4. [12]

    Morgan kaufmann, 2007

    Ingemar Cox, Matthew Miller, Jeffrey Bloom, Jessica Fridrich, and Ton Kalker.Digital watermarking and steganography. Morgan kaufmann, 2007. 1, 2, 6, 7

    2007

  5. [13]

    Secure spread spectrum watermarking for multi- media.IEEE TIP, 6(12):1673–1687, 1997

    Ingemar J Cox, Joe Kilian, F Thomson Leighton, and Talal Shamoon. Secure spread spectrum watermarking for multi- media.IEEE TIP, 6(12):1673–1687, 1997. 1, 2

    1997

  6. [14]

    Diffusionshield: A water- mark for data copyright protection against generative diffu- sion models.ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, 26(2): 60–75, 2025

    Yingqian Cui, Jie Ren, Han Xu, Pengfei He, Hui Liu, Lichao Sun, Yue Xing, and Jiliang Tang. Diffusionshield: A water- mark for data copyright protection against generative diffu- sion models.ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, 26(2): 60–75, 2025. 2

    2025

  7. [15]

    An improved wavelet domain digital watermarking for image protection.International journal of wavelets, multiresolution and information processing, 8(01): 19–31, 2010

    DEJEY and RS Rajesh. An improved wavelet domain digital watermarking for image protection.International journal of wavelets, multiresolution and information processing, 8(01): 19–31, 2010. 1, 2

    2010

  8. [16]

    Denso Wave, 2011

    Denso Wave Incorporated.QR Code Essentials. Denso Wave, 2011. Available at:https://www.qrcode. com/en/about/standards.html. 4

    2011

  9. [17]

    Diffusion models beat gans on image synthesis.Advances in neural informa- tion processing systems, 34:8780–8794, 2021

    Prafulla Dhariwal and Alexander Nichol. Diffusion models beat gans on image synthesis.Advances in neural informa- tion processing systems, 34:8780–8794, 2021. 1

    2021

  10. [18]

    Deep template- based watermarking.IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Sys- tems for Video Technology, 31(4):1436–1451, 2020

    Han Fang, Dongdong Chen, Qidong Huang, Jie Zhang, Ze- hua Ma, Weiming Zhang, and Nenghai Yu. Deep template- based watermarking.IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Sys- tems for Video Technology, 31(4):1436–1451, 2020. 1

    2020

  11. [19]

    De-end: decoder-driven wa- termarking network.IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 25: 7571–7581, 2022

    Han Fang, Zhaoyang Jia, Yupeng Qiu, Jiyi Zhang, Weiming Zhang, and Ee-Chien Chang. De-end: decoder-driven wa- termarking network.IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 25: 7571–7581, 2022. 1

    2022

  12. [20]

    Aqualora: Toward white-box protection for customized stable diffusion models via watermark lora.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.11135, 2024

    Weitao Feng, Wenbo Zhou, Jiyan He, Jie Zhang, Tianyi Wei, Guanlin Li, Tianwei Zhang, Weiming Zhang, and Nenghai Yu. Aqualora: Toward white-box protection for customized stable diffusion models via watermark lora.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.11135, 2024. 1, 2

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Watermarking images in self-supervised latent spaces

    Pierre Fernandez, Alexandre Sablayrolles, Teddy Furon, Herv´e J´egou, and Matthijs Douze. Watermarking images in self-supervised latent spaces. InICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pages 3054–3058. IEEE, 2022. 1

    2022

  14. [22]

    The stable signature: Rooting watermarks in latent diffusion models

    Pierre Fernandez, Guillaume Couairon, Herv ´e J ´egou, Matthijs Douze, and Teddy Furon. The stable signature: Rooting watermarks in latent diffusion models. InProceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Com- puter Vision, pages 22466–22477, 2023. 1, 2, 6, 7

    2023

  15. [23]

    Freq- mark: Invisible image watermarking via frequency based op- timization in latent space.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.20824,

    Yiyang Guo, Ruizhe Li, Mude Hui, Hanzhong Guo, Chen Zhang, Chuangjian Cai, Le Wan, and Shangfei Wang. Freq- mark: Invisible image watermarking via frequency based op- timization in latent space.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.20824,

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilib- rium.Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    Martin Heusel, Hubert Ramsauer, Thomas Unterthiner, Bernhard Nessler, and Sepp Hochreiter. Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilib- rium.Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017. 6

    2017

  17. [25]

    Denoising dif- fusion probabilistic models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020

    Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising dif- fusion probabilistic models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020. 1, 4 9

    2020

  18. [26]

    Con- volutional neural network-based digital image watermarking adaptive to the resolution of image and watermark.Applied Sciences, 10(19):6854, 2020

    Jae-Eun Lee, Young-Ho Seo, and Dong-Wook Kim. Con- volutional neural network-based digital image watermarking adaptive to the resolution of image and watermark.Applied Sciences, 10(19):6854, 2020. 1

    2020

  19. [27]

    Dif- fusetrace: A transparent and flexible watermarking scheme for latent diffusion model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.02696,

    Liangqi Lei, Keke Gai, Jing Yu, and Liehuang Zhu. Dif- fusetrace: A transparent and flexible watermarking scheme for latent diffusion model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.02696,

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    Dither modulation of significant amplitude differ- ence for wavelet based robust watermarking.Neurocomput- ing, 166:404–415, 2015

    Chunlei Li, Zhaoxiang Zhang, Yunhong Wang, Bin Ma, and Di Huang. Dither modulation of significant amplitude differ- ence for wavelet based robust watermarking.Neurocomput- ing, 166:404–415, 2015. 1, 2

    2015

  21. [29]

    Microsoft coco: Common objects in context

    Tsung-Yi Lin, Michael Maire, Serge Belongie, James Hays, Pietro Perona, Deva Ramanan, Piotr Doll´ar, and C Lawrence Zitnick. Microsoft coco: Common objects in context. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2014: 13th European Conference, Zurich, Switzerland, September 6-12, 2014, Proceeding...

    2014

  22. [30]

    Distortion agnostic deep watermarking

    Xiyang Luo, Ruohan Zhan, Huiwen Chang, Feng Yang, and Peyman Milanfar. Distortion agnostic deep watermarking. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vi- sion and pattern recognition, pages 13548–13557, 2020. 1

    2020

  23. [31]

    Latent watermark: Inject and detect watermarks in latent diffusion space.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.00230, 2024

    Zheling Meng, Bo Peng, and Jing Dong. Latent watermark: Inject and detect watermarks in latent diffusion space.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.00230, 2024. 1, 2

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Analysis of watermarking systems in the frequency domain and its application to de- sign of robust watermarking systems

    A Miyazaki and A Okamoto. Analysis of watermarking systems in the frequency domain and its application to de- sign of robust watermarking systems. InProceedings 2001 International Conference on Image Processing (Cat. No. 01CH37205), pages 506–509. IEEE, 2001. 2

    2001

  25. [33]

    Glide: Towards photorealistic image generation and editing with text-guided diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.10741, 2021

    Alex Nichol, Prafulla Dhariwal, Aditya Ramesh, Pranav Shyam, Pamela Mishkin, Bob McGrew, Ilya Sutskever, and Mark Chen. Glide: Towards photorealistic image generation and editing with text-guided diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.10741, 2021. 1

    2021 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervi- sion

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervi- sion. InInternational conference on machine learning, p...

    2021

  27. [35]

    Hierarchical text-conditional image gener- ation with clip latents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.06125, 1 (2):3, 2022

    Aditya Ramesh, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alex Nichol, Casey Chu, and Mark Chen. Hierarchical text-conditional image gener- ation with clip latents.arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.06125, 1 (2):3, 2022. 1

    2022 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Lawa: Using latent space for in-generation image watermarking.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.05868, 2024

    Ahmad Rezaei, Mohammad Akbari, Saeed Ranjbar Alvar, Arezou Fatemi, and Yong Zhang. Lawa: Using latent space for in-generation image watermarking.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.05868, 2024. 1, 2

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models

    Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Bj ¨orn Ommer. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 10684–10695, 2022. 1, 2, 6

    2022

  30. [38]

    Rotation, scale and translation invariant spread spectrum digital image wa- termarking.Signal processing, 66(3):303–317, 1998

    Joseph JK `O Ruanaidh and Thierry Pun. Rotation, scale and translation invariant spread spectrum digital image wa- termarking.Signal processing, 66(3):303–317, 1998. 1, 2

    1998

  31. [39]

    Photorealistic text-to-image diffusion models with deep language understanding.Advances in neural information processing systems, 35:36479–36494, 2022

    Chitwan Saharia, William Chan, Saurabh Saxena, Lala Li, Jay Whang, Emily L Denton, Kamyar Ghasemipour, Raphael Gontijo Lopes, Burcu Karagol Ayan, Tim Salimans, et al. Photorealistic text-to-image diffusion models with deep language understanding.Advances in neural information ...

    2022

  32. [40]

    Gustavosta: Stable-diffusion- prompts.https://huggingface.co/datasets/ Gustavosta/Stable-Diffusion-Prompts, 2022

    Gustavo Santana. Gustavosta: Stable-diffusion- prompts.https://huggingface.co/datasets/ Gustavosta/Stable-Diffusion-Prompts, 2022. 6

    2022

  33. [41]

    Denoising diffusion implicit models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.02502, 2020

    Jiaming Song, Chenlin Meng, and Stefano Ermon. Denoising diffusion implicit models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.02502, 2020. 1, 3, 6

    2010 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Stegastamp: Invisible hyperlinks in physical photographs

    Matthew Tancik, Ben Mildenhall, and Ren Ng. Stegastamp: Invisible hyperlinks in physical photographs. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 2117–2126, 2020. 1

    2020

  35. [43]

    Reversible data embedding using a difference ex- pansion.IEEE transactions on circuits and systems for video technology, 13(8):890–896, 2003

    Jun Tian. Reversible data embedding using a difference ex- pansion.IEEE transactions on circuits and systems for video technology, 13(8):890–896, 2003. 1, 2

    2003

  36. [44]

    A digital watermark

    Ron G Van Schyndel, Andrew Z Tirkel, and Charles F Os- borne. A digital watermark. InProceedings of 1st interna- tional conference on image processing, pages 86–90. IEEE,

  37. [45]

    A comprehensive survey on robust image watermarking.Neurocomputing, 488:226–247, 2022

    Wenbo Wan, Jun Wang, Yunming Zhang, Jing Li, Hui Yu, and Jiande Sun. A comprehensive survey on robust image watermarking.Neurocomputing, 488:226–247, 2022. 2

    2022

  38. [46]

    Diffu- siondb: A large-scale prompt gallery dataset for text-to- image generative models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.14896,

    Zijie J Wang, Evan Montoya, David Munechika, Haoyang Yang, Benjamin Hoover, and Duen Horng Chau. Diffu- siondb: A large-scale prompt gallery dataset for text-to- image generative models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.14896,

    arXiv

  39. [47]

    Research of a digital image watermarking algorithm resisting geometrical attacks in fourier domain

    Xiu-mei Wen, Wei Zhao, and Fan-xing Meng. Research of a digital image watermarking algorithm resisting geometrical attacks in fourier domain. In2009 International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Security, pages 265–268. IEEE, 2009. 2

    2009

  40. [48]

    Tree-rings watermarks: Invisible fingerprints for diffusion images.Advances in Neural Information Process- ing Systems, 36, 2024

    Yuxin Wen, John Kirchenbauer, Jonas Geiping, and Tom Goldstein. Tree-rings watermarks: Invisible fingerprints for diffusion images.Advances in Neural Information Process- ing Systems, 36, 2024. 2, 3, 4, 5, 7

    2024

  41. [49]

    Perceptual watermarks for digital images and video

    Raymond B Wolfgang, Christine I Podilchuk, and Edward J Delp. Perceptual watermarks for digital images and video. Proceedings of the IEEE, 87(7):1108–1126, 1999. 1, 2

    1999

  42. [50]

    Gaussian shading: Prov- able performance-lossless image watermarking for diffusion models

    Zijin Yang, Kai Zeng, Kejiang Chen, Han Fang, Weim- ing Zhang, and Nenghai Yu. Gaussian shading: Prov- able performance-lossless image watermarking for diffusion models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 12162– 12171, 2024. 2

    2024

  43. [51]

    A training-free plug-and-play watermark framework for stable diffusion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.05607, 2024

    Guokai Zhang, Lanjun Wang, Yuting Su, and An-An Liu. A training-free plug-and-play watermark framework for stable diffusion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.05607, 2024. 1, 2

    2024

  44. [52]

    Robust invisible video watermark- ing with attention.arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.01285, 2019

    Kevin Alex Zhang, Lei Xu, Alfredo Cuesta-Infante, and Kalyan Veeramachaneni. Robust invisible video watermark- ing with attention.arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.01285, 2019. 1, 6, 7 10

    1909 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Attack-resilient image water- marking using stable diffusion.Advances in Neural Infor- mation Processing Systems, 37:38480–38507, 2025

    Lijun Zhang, Xiao Liu, Antoni Martin, Cindy Bearfield, Yuriy Brun, and Hui Guan. Attack-resilient image water- marking using stable diffusion.Advances in Neural Infor- mation Processing Systems, 37:38480–38507, 2025. 2, 3, 4, 6, 7

    2025

  46. [54]

    Editguard: Versatile image watermarking for tamper localization and copyright protection

    Xuanyu Zhang, Runyi Li, Jiwen Yu, Youmin Xu, Weiqi Li, and Jian Zhang. Editguard: Versatile image watermarking for tamper localization and copyright protection. InProceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 11964–11974, 2024. 1, 2

    2024

  47. [55]

    Generative autoencoders as watermark attackers: Analyses of vulnerabilities and threats

    Xuandong Zhao, Kexun Zhang, Yu-Xiang Wang, and Lei Li. Generative autoencoders as watermark attackers: Analyses of vulnerabilities and threats. 2023. 2

    2023

  48. [56]

    Invisible image watermarks are provably removable using generative ai.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:8643–8672, 2025

    Xuandong Zhao, Kexun Zhang, Zihao Su, Saastha Vasan, Ilya Grishchenko, Christopher Kruegel, Giovanni Vigna, Yu- Xiang Wang, and Lei Li. Invisible image watermarks are provably removable using generative ai.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:8643–8672, 2025. 2, 6, 4

    2025

  49. [57]

    Dari-mark: Deep learning and attention network for robust image watermarking.Mathematics, 11(1):209, 2022

    Yimeng Zhao, Chengyou Wang, Xiao Zhou, and Zhiliang Qin. Dari-mark: Deep learning and attention network for robust image watermarking.Mathematics, 11(1):209, 2022. 1

    2022

  50. [58]

    Hidden: Hiding data with deep networks

    Jiren Zhu, Russell Kaplan, Justin Johnson, and Li Fei-Fei. Hidden: Hiding data with deep networks. InProceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV), pages 657–672, 2018. 1 11 Semantic Watermarking Reinvented: Enhancing Robustness and Generation Quality with F...

    2018

  51. [59]

    Scope Clarification on Tampering Robustness Our method is designed for robust watermarking

    Clarifications and Task Overview 7.1. Scope Clarification on Tampering Robustness Our method is designed for robust watermarking. It aims to preserve the embedded information even when the con- tent undergoes typical, non-malicious changes during dis- tribution or transformati...

  52. [60]

    Additional Experimental Evidence 8.1. Processing Time and Detection Performance This section presents the processing time and detection per- formance (verification and identification) of different wa- termarking methods. As shown in Tab. 5, themerged-in- generationapproach doe...

  53. [61]

    Supplementary Experimental Results 9.1. Reporting Bit Accuracy Results In the main paper, we use Bit Accuracy for verification and Perfect Match Rate for identification to evaluate the detec- tion performance of bitstream-based approaches in Sec. 5.2. Following feedback receiv...

  54. [62]

    As syn- thetic media becomes ubiquitous, embedding provenance signals at generation time, rather than through costly post- processing, will become increasingly vital

    Outlook and Deployment Considerations The growing accessibility of LDMs has enabled an un- precedented scale of generative content creation. As syn- thetic media becomes ubiquitous, embedding provenance signals at generation time, rather than through costly post- processing, w...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.