Papers › Towards Reliable Verification of Unauthorized Data Usage in Personalized Text-to-Image...
Towards Reliable Verification of Unauthorized Data Usage in Personalized Text-to-Image Diffusion Models
Boheng Li, Yanhao Wei, Yankai Fu, Zhenting Wang, Yiming Li, Jie Zhang, Run Wang, Tianwei Zhang
Text-to-image diffusion models are pushing the boundaries of what generative AI can achieve in our lives. Beyond their ability to generate general images, new personalization techniques have been proposed to customize the pre-trained base models for crafting images with specific themes or styles. Such a lightweight solution, enabling AI practitioners and developers to easily build their own personalized models, also poses a new concern regarding whether the personalized models are trained from unauthorized data. A promising solution is to proactively enable data traceability in generative models, where data owners embed external coatings (e.g., image watermarks or backdoor triggers) onto the datasets before releasing. Later the models trained over such datasets will also learn the coatings and unconsciously reproduce them in the generated mimicries, which can be extracted and used as the data usage evidence. However, we identify the existing coatings cannot be effectively learned in personalization tasks, making the corresponding verification less reliable. In this paper, we introduce SIREN, a novel methodology to proactively trace unauthorized data usage in black-box personalized text-to-image diffusion models. Our approach optimizes the coating in a delicate way to be recognized by the model as a feature relevant to the personalization task, thus significantly improving its learnability. We also utilize a human perceptual-aware constraint, a hypersphere classification technique, and a hypothesis-testing-guided verification method to enhance the stealthiness and detection accuracy of the coating. The effectiveness of SIREN is verified through extensive experiments on a diverse set of benchmark datasets, models, and learning algorithms. SIREN is also effective in various real-world scenarios and evaluated against potential countermeasures. Our code is publicly available.
In Syntology View this paper on Syntology: its repositories, every harvested function with whether it ran, its licence and the call to fetch it.
Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2410.10437")
Code
Syntology Ran 2 of 2 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran · violated contract.
By repository: official repository: 2 samples from 1 repository, 2 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
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
2 samples harvested; 2 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-25; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 2 of the 2 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from antigonerandy/siren. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
59663425581741e2 · report
99a26b89440625b3 · report
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
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