Who Gets Flagged? The Pluralistic Evaluation Gap in AI Content Watermarking
Fuente:
arXiv
Gespeichert in:
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Veröffentlicht: |
2026
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| _version_ | 1866911595398955008 |
|---|---|
| author | Nemecek, Alexander Zafar, Osama Xu, Yuqiao Li, Wenbiao Ayday, Erman |
| author_facet | Nemecek, Alexander Zafar, Osama Xu, Yuqiao Li, Wenbiao Ayday, Erman |
| contents | Watermarking is becoming the default mechanism for AI content authentication, with governance policies and frameworks referencing it as infrastructure for content provenance. Yet across text, image, and audio modalities, watermark signal strength, detectability, and robustness depend on statistical properties of the content itself, properties that vary systematically across languages, cultural visual traditions, and demographic groups. We examine how this content dependence creates modality-specific pathways to bias. Reviewing the major watermarking benchmarks across modalities, we find that, with one exception, none report performance across languages, cultural content types, or population groups. To address this, we propose three concrete evaluation dimensions for pluralistic watermark benchmarking: cross-lingual detection parity, culturally diverse content coverage, and demographic disaggregation of detection metrics. We connect these to the governance frameworks currently mandating watermarking deployment and show that watermarking is held to a lower fairness standard than the generative systems it is meant to govern. Our position is that evaluation must precede deployment, and that the same bias auditing requirements applied to AI models should extend to the verification layer. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2604_13776 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Who Gets Flagged? The Pluralistic Evaluation Gap in AI Content Watermarking Nemecek, Alexander Zafar, Osama Xu, Yuqiao Li, Wenbiao Ayday, Erman Computers and Society Computation and Language Cryptography and Security Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Watermarking is becoming the default mechanism for AI content authentication, with governance policies and frameworks referencing it as infrastructure for content provenance. Yet across text, image, and audio modalities, watermark signal strength, detectability, and robustness depend on statistical properties of the content itself, properties that vary systematically across languages, cultural visual traditions, and demographic groups. We examine how this content dependence creates modality-specific pathways to bias. Reviewing the major watermarking benchmarks across modalities, we find that, with one exception, none report performance across languages, cultural content types, or population groups. To address this, we propose three concrete evaluation dimensions for pluralistic watermark benchmarking: cross-lingual detection parity, culturally diverse content coverage, and demographic disaggregation of detection metrics. We connect these to the governance frameworks currently mandating watermarking deployment and show that watermarking is held to a lower fairness standard than the generative systems it is meant to govern. Our position is that evaluation must precede deployment, and that the same bias auditing requirements applied to AI models should extend to the verification layer. |
| title | Who Gets Flagged? The Pluralistic Evaluation Gap in AI Content Watermarking |
| topic | Computers and Society Computation and Language Cryptography and Security Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.13776 |