A large-scale audit of dataset licensing and attribution in AI
The race to train language models on vast, diverse and inconsistently documented datasets raises pressing legal and ethical concerns. To improve data transparency and understanding, we convene a multi-disciplinary effort between legal and machine learning experts to systematically audit and trace more than 1,800 text datasets. We develop tools and standards to trace the lineage of these datasets, including their source, creators, licences and subsequent use. Our landscape analysis highlights sharp divides in the composition and focus of data licenced for commercial use. Important categories including low-resource languages, creative tasks and new synthetic data all tend to be restrictively licenced. We observe frequent miscategorization of licences on popular dataset hosting sites, with licence omission rates of more than 70% and error rates of more than 50%. This highlights a crisis in misattribution and informed use of popular datasets driving many recent breakthroughs. Our analysis of data sources also explains the application of copyright law and fair use to finetuning data. As a contribution to continuing improvements in dataset transparency and responsible use, we release our audit, with an interactive user interface, the Data Provenance Explorer, to enable practitioners to trace and filter on data provenance for the most popular finetuning data collections: www.dataprovenance.org.

A Human-Centric Framework for Data Attribution in Large Language Models
In the current Large Language Model (LLM) ecosystem, creators have little agency over how their data is used, and LLM users may find themselves unknowingly plagiarizing existing sources. Attribution of LLM-generated text to LLM input data could help with these challenges, but so far we have more questions than answers: what elements of LLM outputs require attribution, what goals should it serve, how should it be implemented? We contribute a human-centric data attribution framework, which situates the attribution problem within the broader data economy. Specific use cases for attribution, such as creative writing assistance or fact-checking, can be specified via a set of parameters (including stakeholder objectives and implementation criteria). These criteria are up for negotiation by the relevant stakeholder groups: creators, LLM users, and their intermediaries (publishers, platforms, AI companies). The outcome of domain-specific negotiations can be implemented and tested for whether the stakeholder goals are achieved. The proposed approach provides a bridge between methodological NLP work on data attribution, governance work on policy interventions, and economic analysis of creator incentives for a sustainable equilibrium in the data economy.

Permissive-Washing in the Open AI Supply Chain: A Large-Scale Audit of License Integrity
Permissive licenses like MIT, Apache-2.0, and BSD-3-Clause dominate open-source AI, signaling that artifacts like models, datasets, and code can be freely used, modified, and redistributed. However, these licenses carry mandatory requirements: include the full license text, provide a copyright notice, and preserve upstream attribution, that remain unverified at scale. Failure to meet these conditions can place reuse outside the scope of the license, effectively leaving AI artifacts under default copyright for those uses and exposing downstream users to litigation. We call this phenomenon ``permissive washing'': labeling AI artifacts as free to use, while omitting the legal documentation required to make that label actionable. To assess how widespread permissive washing is in the AI supply chain, we empirically audit 124,278 dataset $\rightarrow$ model $\rightarrow$ application supply chains, spanning 3,338 datasets, 6,664 models, and 28,516 applications across Hugging Face and GitHub. We find that an astonishing 96.5\% of datasets and 95.8\% of models lack the required license text, only 2.3\% of datasets and 3.2\% of models satisfy both license text and copyright requirements, and even when upstream artifacts provide complete licensing evidence, attribution rarely propagates downstream: only 27.59\% of models preserve compliant dataset notices and only 5.75\% of applications preserve compliant model notices (with just 6.38\% preserving any linked upstream notice). Practitioners cannot assume permissive labels confer the rights they claim: license files and notices, not metadata, are the source of legal truth. To support future research, we release our full audit dataset and reproducible pipeline.

WASA: WAtermark-based Source Attribution for Large Language Model-Generated Data
The impressive performances of Large Language Models (LLMs) and their immense potential for commercialization have given rise to serious concerns over the Intellectual Property (IP) of their training data. In particular, the synthetic texts generated by LLMs may infringe the IP of the data being used to train the LLMs. To this end, it is imperative to be able to perform source attribution by identifying the data provider who contributed to the generation of a synthetic text by an LLM. In this paper, we show that this problem can be tackled by watermarking, i.e., by enabling an LLM to generate synthetic texts with embedded watermarks that contain information about their source(s). We identify the key properties of such watermarking frameworks (e.g., source attribution accuracy, robustness against adversaries), and propose a source attribution framework that satisfies these key properties due to our algorithmic designs. Our framework enables an LLM to learn an accurate mapping from the generated texts to data providers, which sets the foundation for effective source attribution. Extensive empirical evaluations show that our framework achieves effective source attribution.
Related work | Data Counterfactuals
Adjacent research areas and starting papers, curated in Semble and synced into the site.

Perspective Chapter: Fit for Purpose? Creative Commons Licensing for Research Data in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Licensing is an important component of the re-usability of research data, itself part of the FAIR principles: without clear, machine-readable licensing, datasets risk becoming technically...

Data Supply Chains
Data is a critical resource. Like oil, gold, or lithium, both companies and countries covet data. Ultimately, like oil, data’s flow can enrich those that posses
Can “Conscious Data Contribution” Help Users to Exert “Data Leverage” Against Technology Companies?
Tech users currently have limited ability to act on concerns regarding the negative societal impacts of large tech companies. However, recent work suggests that users can exert leverage using their role in the generation of valuable data, for instance by withholding their data contributions to intelligent technologies. We propose and evaluate a new means to exert this type of leverage against tech companies: "conscious data contribution" (CDC).
Data Leverage: A Framework for Empowering the Public in its...
Many powerful computing technologies rely on implicit and explicit data contributions from the public. This dependency suggests a potential source of leverage for the public in its relationship...

datasetpapers — a public research experiment
An experimental approach to versioned, forkable, machine-readable analyses. A prototype, not a product or service.

datasetpapers — a public research experiment
An experimental approach to versioned, forkable, machine-readable analyses. A prototype, not a product or service.

Validation Free and Replication Robust Volume-based Data Valuation
Data valuation arises as a non-trivial challenge in real-world use cases such as collaborative machine learning, federated learning, trusted data sharing, data marketplaces. The value of data is often associated with the learning performance (e.g., validation accuracy) of a model trained on the data, which introduces a close coupling between data valuation and validation. However, a validation set may notbe available in practice and it can be challenging for the data providers to reach an agreement on the choice of the validation set. Another practical issue is that of data replication: Given the value of some data points, a dishonest data provider may replicate these data points to exploit the valuation for a larger reward/payment. We observe that the diversity of the data points is an inherent property of a dataset that is independent of validation. We formalize diversity via the volume of the data matrix (i.e., determinant of its left Gram), which allows us to establish a formal connection between the diversity of data and learning performance without requiring validation. Furthermore, we propose a robust volume measure with a theoretical guarantee on the replication robustness by following the intuition that copying the same data points does not increase the diversity of data. We perform extensive experiments to demonstrate its consistency in valuation and practical advantages over existing baselines and show that our method is model- and task-agnostic and can be flexibly adapted to handle various neural networks.
Crossref: The sustainable source of community-owned scholarly metadata
This paper describes the scholarly metadata collected and made available by Crossref, as well as its importance in the scholarly research ecosystem. Containing over 106 million records and expanding at an average rate of 11% a year, Crossref’s metadata has become one of the major sources of scholarly data for publishers, authors, librarians, funders, and researchers. The metadata set consists of 13 content types, including not only traditional types, such as journals and conference papers, but also data sets, reports, preprints, peer reviews, and grants. The metadata is not limited to basic publication metadata, but can also include abstracts and links to full text, funding and license information, citation links, and the information about corrections, updates, retractions, etc. This scale and breadth make Crossref a valuable source for research in scientometrics, including measuring the growth and impact of science and understanding new trends in scholarly communications. The metadata is available through a number of APIs, including REST API and OAI-PMH. In this paper, we describe the kind of metadata that Crossref provides and how it is collected and curated. We also look at Crossref’s role in the research ecosystem and trends in metadata curation over the years, including the evolution of its citation data provision. We summarize the research used in Crossref’s metadata and describe plans that will improve metadata quality and retrieval in the future.

FAIR Principles - GO FAIR
In 2016, the ‘FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship’ were published in Scientific Data. The authors intended to provide guidelines to improve the Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reuse of digital assets. The principles emphasise machine-actionability (i.e., the capacity of… Continue reading →

science.latha.org
A permissioned appview for scientific documents on AT Protocol. True data ownership with optional monetization.
Ethical Source: Open Source, Evolved.
The Organization for Ethical Source is a global, multidisciplinary community devoted to centering justice, equity, and human rights in the practice of open source.

Part of the datacounterfactuals.org reading lists. Research on data provenance, dataset documentation, licensing and attribution audits, and technical source-attribution methods for understanding which data sources are available, permitted, or responsible for model behavior.