Papers › Ensemble Watermarks for Large Language Models

Ensemble Watermarks for Large Language Models

29 Nov 2024arXiv:2411.19563archive 2025-07-28

Georg Niess, Roman Kern

The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has made it increasingly difficult to distinguish between text written by humans and machines. While watermarks already exist for LLMs, they often lack flexibility, and struggle with attacks such as paraphrasing. To address these issues, we propose a multi-feature method for generating watermarks that combines multiple distinct watermark features into an ensemble watermark. Concretely, we combine acrostica and sensorimotor norms with the established red-green watermark to achieve a 98% detection rate. After a paraphrasing attack the performance remains high with 95% detection rate. The red-green feature alone as baseline achieves a detection rate of 49%. The evaluation of all feature combinations reveals that the ensemble of all three consistently has the highest detection rate across several LLMs and watermark strength settings. Due to the flexibility of combining features in the ensemble, various requirements and trade-offs can be addressed. Additionally, for all ensemble configurations the same detection function can be used without adaptations. This method is particularly of interest to facilitate accountability and prevent societal harm.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

commodoreeu/master-generation officialmentioned in paperpytorch report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections