Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This paper provides rigorous minimax bounds for recursive discrete distribution estimation when synthetic watermarked samples are mixed with real data, revealing fundamental limits on improving detection efficacy without vanishing false negatives. The authors demonstrate that simple deterministic estimators often match these lower bounds and introduce a masking randomization technique to address remaining performance gaps in specific regimes. These theoretical insights clarify the trade-offs between watermarking utility and estimation accuracy in asymptotic settings where real sample fractions diminish.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Minimax bounds for watermarked and masked recursive discrete distribution estimation

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2608.31091v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Watermarking has been proposed as a way to identify synthetic samples in estimation settings where no metadata is available to distinguish them from real samples, but its precise effects remain unexplored. In the absence of a distinguishing mechanism, it has been shown that adding synthetic samples significantly reduces the marginal efficacy of new real samples. In this work, we study the minimax loss of such recursive discrete distribution estimation in the presence of watermarks in contrast to the unassisted and oracle-assisted losses. When the fraction of real samples vanishes asymptotically, we provide a lower bound that shows that it is impossible to improve performance by adding watermarks unless the false negative rate of detection also vanishes. Additionally, we show that in most regimes, the worst-case losses of a sequence of simple deterministic estimators match the corresponding lower bounds up to constants. Finally, we propose masking, a randomization procedure that narrows the gap in the remaining regimes to a Jensen gap. We conjecture that a tighter lower bound argument can close this gap.

Abstract:Watermarking has been proposed as a way to identify synthetic samples in estimation settings where no metadata is available to distinguish them from real samples, but its precise effects remain unexplored. In the absence of a distinguishing mechanism, it has been shown that adding synthetic samples significantly reduces the marginal efficacy of new real samples. In this work, we study the minimax loss of such recursive discrete distribution estimation in the presence of watermarks in contrast to the unassisted and oracle-assisted losses. When the fraction of real samples vanishes asymptotically, we provide a lower bound that shows that it is impossible to improve performance by adding watermarks unless the false negative rate of detection also vanishes. Additionally, we show that in most regimes, the worst-case losses of a sequence of simple deterministic estimators match the corresponding lower bounds up to constants. Finally, we propose masking, a randomization procedure that narrows the gap in the remaining regimes to a Jensen gap. We conjecture that a tighter lower bound argument can close this gap.

Information Theory (cs.IT); Machine Learning (cs.LG); Statistics Theory (math.ST)

arXiv:2608.31091 [cs.IT]

(or arXiv:2608.31091v1 [cs.IT] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.31091 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 272 words

Related coverage